Despite the recent record breaking £5.14bn TV deal for English football many elite football clubs in London still to refuse to pay many of their employees the London Living Wage. The fact this kind of poverty pay still exists in a multi-billion pound industry is nothing short of a scandal.

Whilst the players are undoubtedly the stars, it’s the football club employees – from ground staff to suppliers – who undertake crucial work that fosters much of the match day atmosphere the English game is so famed for, and which makes it so lucrative and appealing to TV companies.

Many clubs pay weekly six-figure wages to their star players and spend hundreds of millions on the recruitment of talent. So, the fact that numerous clubs fail to pay some employees a living wage – worth £9.15 an hour – is as indefensible as it is unjust. Such comparisons really do bring home the stark inequality blighting the beautiful game.

Fortunately change appears within reach. Chelsea Football Club became the first club in the Premier League to sign up to pay the London Living Wage last year. This has thrown down the gauntlet to the capital’s other clubs. Over the weekend West Ham also announced they would pay the London Living Wage from June this year. By following their example London’s clubs have the opportunity to lead the way and put fairness back into football, resolving the ugly truth about unequal pay in the beautiful game.

London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi said he is ‘deeply concerned’ after a new report showed that over half of Londoners feel ‘fairly’ or ‘very unconfident’ that London’s emergency services are coping under the pressure of cuts and increased demand. The “Emergency Services: Casualty of Cuts?” report, published by Labour’s London Assembly Crime Spokesperson, Joanne McCartney AM, warned that the capital’s emergency services could reach crisis point without better funding from Government.

Almost 1,500 Londoners were surveyed for the report which found that the majority (57%), felt ‘unconfident’ that emergency services were coping with the increased demand, whilst only 18% said they were ‘fairly’ or ‘very confident’. The report comes just a week after the London’s population hit a record 8.6m. Murad Qureshi AM said the Government must now act quickly to ensure London’s emergency services have enough funds to cope with rapidly increasing demands.

The report warned that a combination of cuts to services, a growing population and increased demand, could mean that emergency services are less able to respond effectively. The impact of cuts to the capital’s emergency services was also highlighted in the report following the closure of 65 police stations, 10 fire stations and with six A&Es either closed or under threat since 2010.

Statistics highlighted in the report from each of the London’s emergency services paint a worrying picture:

• In December 2014, only 48% of ambulances hit the 8 minute response time target, compared with 81% in March 2014
• 249,100 patients had to wait longer than 4 hours in London A&Es last year.
• 5,133 police officers have been cut from London boroughs since May 2010 and violent crime on the rise
• Fire engine response times are up in over half of the capital’s wards since the 10 fire station closures

London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi AM said:

“We all rely on the emergency services to be there when we need them, so it’s deeply concerning that 57% of Londoners now say they’re unconfident services are coping. With services edging ever closer to crisis point, this report makes it clear that the Government must act quickly to make sure our blue light services, including those in Kensington and Chelsea do not become the casualties of cuts.

“London’s population is already at a record high and is set to grow even further in the coming years. Over the past five years we’ve seen our emergency infrastructure stretched, with many of London’s A&E departments, police and fire stations closed and services struggling to hit their targets. With the emergency services warning of further budget cuts on the horizon we need assurances from Government, whoever is in power, that the burden of cuts won’t fall so heavily that these vital services cannot cope.”

London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi AM has accused Mayor Boris Johnson of “accepting defeat in the battle to tackle London’s housing crisis” after setting a target to build just 42,000 new homes a year. Boris Johnson has set the target despite his own evidence showing that 62,000 must be built to clear the backlog on housing waiting lists in Westminster and across London within ten years.

The house building targets were included in alterations to the Mayor’s controversial London Plan which were recently pushed through despite the majority of London Assembly Members, including Murad Qureshi AM, voting against the proposals. Murad Qureshi AM said the Mayor’s “unambitious” target would leave the capital stuck with an ever-deepening housing crisis. Particular concerns were raised that the affordable housing targets within the plan, for only 17,000 new affordable homes a year, would come nowhere near to meeting the needs of Londoners.

Despite setting a target for 42,000 new homes each year, the Mayor recognised that tens of thousands more were necessary to meet London’s growing housing need. Instead of including these in his target, the Mayor has said he expects Local Authorities to make up the difference but failed to give any strategic direction as to how councils could achieve the 20,000 extra homes that are needed to bridge the gap.

The vote came in the same week that the capital’s population hit record limits, reaching 8.6m for the first time. It also came a week after a new report from the Chartered Institute of Housing found that 76% Londoners now believe there is a housing crisis in their area.

London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi AM said:

“By setting a house building target well below what his own evidence shows we need, the Mayor is accepting defeat in the battle to tackle London’s housing crisis. Boris Johnson’s complete absence of ambition could lock us into this worsening housing crisis for years.

“We need creative and ambitious solutions if we are to successfully tackle the capital’s housing crisis. These targets completely underestimate the need for new housing in areas like Westminster and offer no new plans on how the Mayor proposes to increase the number of homes being built. In Westminster and across London, we need to see genuinely affordable housing being prioritised. What we don’t need is yet more overly-expensive luxury flats which most Londoners could never afford.

“Boris Johnson has had seven years now to come up with a plan to tackle London’s housing need, instead we’ve seen rocketing house prices and rental charges, and not enough homes to meet demand. This was the Mayor’s final opportunity to put in place a legacy which would leave London able to build its way out of this housing crisis. He has failed to do so and sadly it is people in Westminster and Londoners in general who will suffer as a result.”

Yet again we hear of another super basement development in the pages of ES today. This time a two storey basement that will transform an already huge £ 20 million house in Belgravia, as local residents get the sinking feeling.

So l am glad l raised the issue when the Mayor finally put his Final Alterations to London Plan. I highlighted the plight of Bayswater residents, you have seen 15 such mega-basement developments just on the boundary between City of Westminster & Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea in the past 18 months.

I am not sure how much the reassures of the Deputy Mayor will assist the local boroughs to defend their residents in their battle against the blight caused to their lives with these mega-basements particularly in Bayswater where clearly we have some exporting across the borough boundaries. We will have to keep a careful eye on what impact the Mayors Special Planning Guidance (SPG) has on this growing problem in Central London. 

I recently asked how much is Transport for London (TfL) saving as a result of the recent dramatic fall in petrol costs? I only got a partial answer from them in reference solely to the buses as TfL hide behind their contracts with the bus operators just like their did with getting the bus drivers the London Living Wage across all 12 operators recently. It will be interesting to know the answer in relation to the trains as well, which l suspect will be quite different story.

Then l asked if TfL hedged their bets against energy costs with the banks? l got a better response this time. TfL does not currently mitigate its exposure to the risk of changes in energy prices through hedging with banks. In reality TfL has outsourced 99 per cent of its energy purchasing (circa £130 million per annum) to the Crown Commercial Service (CCS), which acts as TfL’s Risk Manager and Framework provider.

I also asked the Transport Commissioner Peter Hendy, at City Hall more directly how will the paying public benefit from these energy cost savings? It did not appear to occur to him that this was a reasonably demand to make of his TfL empire. It will be something l will continue to ask about.

Following Boris Johnson’s decision to close three police stations in Westminster, the Mayor promised they would be replaced with an ‘equivalent or better service’ and opened five police contact points in their place.

It was previously reported that an internal Met review found each contact point in London was used by an average of just 1.3 people each week and “do not appear to offer particularly good value for money”. It also said that the geographic location, the opening times and the ‘look and feel’ of contact points were under question.

A detailed review of the contact points was promised in July 2014 but to date nothing has been released by the Metropolitan Police. When questioned about their effectiveness last July 2014 Boris Johnson dismissed concerns saying “contact points are not being used in quite the way that they perhaps could be, but that perhaps is a fault of lack of publicity or whatever.”

When the Mayor made plans to close three police stations in Westminster and replace them with contact points, he promised an ‘equivalent or better’ service. Yet many of the public are completely unaware of their existence and even the Met have questioned their value for money.

I do not rule out contact points potentially having a place in modern policing, but there are clear issues with the way they are currently operating, with some appearing little more than token gestures. They need to be better publicised so that people know they are there, better able to meet the needs of local people, and provide a private setting so victims can speak confidentially with officers.

There are some sensitive crimes people are less likely to want to report over the phone. Unless the public know about these contact points and have the confidence they can discuss their concerns in a confidential setting, many of these crimes may go unreported.

We’ve been waiting almost a whole year now for improvements; it’s time people in Westminster saw action to make contact points fit for purpose.”

Every year the mayor sets out how he will spend £17billion of Londoners’ money.

It’s his chance to show how he will address people’s concerns and invest in the capital’s future.

Sadly the budget that Boris Johnson announced last week does nothing of the sort.

After years of rising transport costs and a grossly diminished police force – two of the most serious issues facing London today – we’ve seen nothing but the same from the Mayor of London.

Londoners wanted to see a budget which tackles these concerns head on.

In its absence it was down to Assembly Members to put forward alternative proposals which address the worries facing Londoners.

That is exactly what my colleagues and I sought to do when we supported two amendments to the Mayor’s 2015/16 Budget that would have put an extra 1,025 police officers on London’s streets and cut transport fares by 2.5 per cent.

Funding an extra 1,025 police officers on London’s streets would mean providing the equivalent of 33 additional officers for every borough in London.

This proposal comes amid concerns that violent crime in London has risen by 24 per cent in just the last year.

These extra police officers would hugely empower boroughs to tackle this worrying trend as well as putting more officers out on the streets.

It’s that visible policing which has suffered as a result of the mayor’s cuts to the police force. The Metropolitan Police Service’s own “Confidence Comparator” figures show that almost half of Londoners now believe the police do not have a visible presence on the street.

This should come as no surprise as many local people have become uneasy with the Mr Johnson’s cuts to local neighbourhood policing, which have contributed to the loss of 4,333 uniformed officers across London since 2010.

The latest available statistics make for worrying reading in boroughs such as Westminster where there are now 20 per cent fewer police officers and 56 per cent fewer PCSOs in the local streets since the current government came into power.

Our proposal of 33 additional police officers would help to start reversing these cuts as Londoners tell us they want.

The other main focus of our alternative was to offer respite for the Londoners who faced the seventh year of fare increases under Boris Johnson this January.

To do this I supported proposals which would have cut travel fares by 2.5 per cent to 2014 levels.

Despite us identifying ample funding to keep fares down (mainly from the Mr Johnson’s miscalculations and Transport for London underspends) he has consistently allowed fares to rise faster than wages.

Recent polling shows that 76 per cent of Londoners now believe that fares are “too high” and, following the 40 per cent rise in ticket costs since Boris Johnson came to power, it is essential to offer some respite to those struggling to cope with the costs of commuting.

Cutting fares back 2.5 per cent to 2014 levels would help reduce pressure on those anxious that their pay cheques will not stretch to cover Mr Johnson’s constant fare hikes.

It would put some £98 million back into the pockets of Londoners.

As with anything, these new police officers and the fares cut need to be funded.

While the Mayor of London’s tokenistic council tax cut would save the capital’s households seven pence a week, cutting fares to last year’s levels would put far more back in the pocket of the average commuter; a saving of a penny a day for each household or extra police on our streets and a much-needed cut to transport fares.

It’s clear which would leave most people in west central London feeling safer and better off.

Though blocked at last week’s meeting, Mr Johnson has the opportunity to revisit the proposals later this month when the London Assembly comes together for a final vote on the budget.

If he really valued the opinions of Londoners Boris Johnson would listens to our proposals and help Londoners concerned about the cuts to police numbers and the rising cost of commuting.

Published in West End Extra, 6 February

Last week’s Question Time in Finchley ended on a deeply depressing note when the last contributor from the audience said “that there is a strong correlation with the rise in the number of Muslims in Europe and the rise in anti-Semitic attacks “, a remark that went unchallenged.  In light of the fact that the programme is pre-recorded, l am surprised and disappointed by the decision to allow the remark to remain in the broadcast without a right of reply.

Such unchallenged remarks, that reach millions of viewers, have the potential to be accepted as fact and potentially damage community relations. The BBC under his Royal Charter like any other element of public service has responsibilities to strengthen mutual understanding, tolerance and promote community relations in ethnically diverse and multicultural societies.

I would urge the BBC to state at the beginning of the next Question Time that there is no evidence to support the claim that there is a correlation between the rising number of Muslims in Europe and anti-Semitic attacks.

Is London ready to have 24 hour Las Vegas type casinos?

Last Friday l put in my letter of objection to LBKC on the proposal of building a 24 hour casino on the lower grounds of the Holiday Inn behind Gloucester tube station along Cromwell Road, South Kensington.

After hearing local resident concerns late last year, l also put in some questions to the Mayor to find out where he stood on the issue but the response didn’t make things any clearer to me or to local residents.

Does the London Plan contain a specific policy which addresses proposals for casino development? The clear answer to this is that the Mayor’s London Plan does not include a specific policy for casinos

What London Plan policies are usually relevant during considerations of planning applications for casino development? Clearly some parts are relevant like entertainment uses; retail and related facilities & services but not directly.

Do any of the Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) documents include guidance which addresses proposals for casino development? The Town Centres SPG recognises casinos as a ‘main town centre use’ in line with the National Planning Policy Framework but clearly South Kensington is not a Town Centre but part of Central London so l am not sure how relevant that will be.

How many strategic planning applications which included a casino have you considered in your current term in office?  You would think he’s had to deal with the issue but clearly not yet so far making how this particular application is handle very critical for London as it will set a precedent.

Now l hear the Mayor is doing a SPG for Central Area Zone (CAZ) and wonder if it will cover the issue. My question to him on this front will hopefully give him the opportunity to assist the borough and its residents for the rejection of the application, as its sure to be pushed very hard by the backers of the casino, Genting UK.

Whilst l await his response to this question, its quite clear he’s not ready to respond to the challenged posed by this mega  24 hour casino down on Cromwell Rd as his much lauded London Plan doesn’t contain a specific policy which addresses proposals for casino development. Furthermore anything he puts in place through SPG may well be too late in the day as the big business interests behind the 24 hour Las Vegas will have to be dealt with immediately. And anyway as we know this Mayor doesn’t really put up a fight against them at all. So its highly likely then that he’ll be letting down the good folk of Kensington & the borough in their battle against the proposal.

It is deeply worrying that the Mayor of London does not have a strategy for tackling fuel poverty despite entering office in 2008. With 5,405 households in Kingston-upon-Thames now living in fuel poverty. Cold Homes Week highlights the need for urgent action to get a grip on this silent killer.

The capital’s cold homes crisis is hitting an increasing number of families in Kingston-upon-Thames, with the latest Government figures revealing that 8.9% of households in the borough cannot afford to adequately heat their homes. Across London as a whole nearly 280,000 families now live in fuel poverty, unable to afford the cost of properly heating their homes. Analysis of ONS figures shows that on average between 2008 and 2013 cold homes were to blame for 853 excess winter deaths each year in London. That means that across the five year period 4,266 Londoners are estimated to have lost their lives as a result of cold and damp housing. In Kingston-upon-Thames 23 people are estimated have died each year from the effects of excess cold.

Despite fuel poverty levels in Kingston-upon-Thames remaining significant at 8.9%, there are concerns that energy companies are failing to meet their obligations to help make homes more energy efficient. The ‘Energy Company Obligation’, which was introduced in 2013, places a legal obligation on large energy companies to deliver energy efficiency measures to homes across the UK but thus far in Kingston-upon-Thames just 0.2% of households have benefitted from the scheme.

London Assembly Member, Murad Qureshi AM said an urgent Londonwide plan was needed to address the numerous factors contributing to and perpetuating fuel poverty in the capital.

With 23 people dying each year in Kingston-upon-Thames as a result of cold homes, the first step is to deliver a long-overdue strategy to address this silent killer. In a modern city like London it is utterly scandalous that people are still dying because they cannot afford to properly heat their homes.

London’s cost of living crisis and rising energy bills have seen many households in Kingston-upon-Thames plunged in fuel poverty. If he is to fulfill his promise to be a Mayor ‘for all of London’ then Boris must take immediate and tangible steps to protect the most vulnerable people in our city.

It is deeply worrying that, seven years into his mayoralty, Boris Johnson is yet to come up with a real strategy for tackling fuel poverty.