Last night as the council informed the world that pork was discovered in halal chicken sausages served at its primary schools, its appears the officers of the council saw fit not to inform the members of the Council on this grave matter for the parents of the City of Westminster. Please see attached e-mail letter from Cllr Papya Qureshi of Westbourne Ward below to the CEO of the Council Mike More:

 Dear Mike,

The fact that you are sending us a PR message and that we actually have more information from a Guardian article, amongst others, shows an utter disregard for the gravity of this matter, which I personally find insulting.

Horse meat is one level, this is a completely different level – you cannot mix the two up and I am worried now that Chartwells may have been providing such meat for a lot longer than you anticipated.

I can not start to explain to you the feeling of disgust and impact this will have on the many Muslim and Jewish residents of Westminster, like myself. In the few hours of this evening, I have already had concerned friends and family members from the borough contact me.

I expect to face many more concerns from residents over the coming days and weeks. The information you have provided so far does not scratch the surface of the concerns people will have and under-equips Muslim members like myself to honestly address this.

Even for the most secular Muslims, one line which is never crossed is the eating of Pork. I find it unacceptable that you did not inform us earlier that concerns of pork contamination were there, that tests were being conducted and what the outcome of these tests were immediately and in more detail.

Both Halal and Kosher meat are so specifically prepared and has indeed been so for many centuries, puts into question: just how hard can it be to get it wrong? Further in a borough where Halal meat is so widely available locally, how does Chartwell, which is paid over £3million by the council, still not manage to deliver?

Your press release uses the terms ‘may have’ and ‘potentially affecting’. Further just last month the council denied that even horse meat was being used and claimed that Chartwell’s meat was fresh and prepared by kitchen staff. What is the true extent of this and what actions is the council taking above and beyond what your press release indicates?

Kind regards,

Cllr Papya Qureshi

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone

For many families in the City of Westminster this is confirmation of their worst fears when the horse meat scandal first broke, particularly muslim ones. That the food served to their children was similiarly contaminated. Its quite clear that the council ( and probably other ones as well across London ) must immediately source their halal food locally rather then through these big suppliers. In the meantime, its going to have to be vegetarian food for the children for the time being, as l understand primary schools like Gateway have notified their parents already this morning.

The council will have lost alot of credibility over this episode and its going to take an awful long time to regain the confidence of some very dissappointed parents and their children in the borough.

Night flights are a key environmental concern for Londoners because of the noise pollution from aircraft at unsettling times when people are just about to fall asleep or in the very early hours in the morning or worst still, in the middle of the night! If you knock on the doors of West London suburbs you won’t hear about the problem of carbon emissions or air quality but you will invariably hear about the blight of aircraft noise on the quality of local resident’s lives and as the top major environmental concern.

It was with this in mind that the London Assembly Health & Environment Committee held a session last week on the government’s consultation on night flights at Heathrow airport. Whilst, cross party, the London Assembly is against the present night flight regime (which permits up to 15 flights during the night, mostly arriving after 5am from the Far East), we will still be responding to some of the  new government proposals.

For example, there is a proposal to allow night flight landings coming in from the west of Heathrow; that is over Thames Valley and in particular Windsor.  This would mean quieter nights for an estimated 100,000 Londoners east of Heathrow including many in Hounslow but increased disturbance for about 15,000 people over in the West.  On paper, this may appear to be the lesser of 2 evils; however night flight changes should not be adopted to the detriment of other Londoners.  The changes should seek to improve the experience for Londoners already affected without creating new problems for other residents.   My view is that Londoners deserve better so watch this space for the Committee’s response to the consultation.

…should say “Welcome to Manchester Stanstead” now that MAG own it!

With completion of the Manchester Airport Group (MAG) take over of Stansted today, there is plenty the Mayor of London could learn from this consortium of Greater Manchester local authorities purchase of this one airport and thus becoming a real player in aviation in London & the South-East. For example how to actually run a commerical airport in the interests of their local authority shareholders rather then going on about airy fairy airport expansion plans in London & the South East. So in this respect local authorities like the City of Manchester along with Bolton, Rochdale, Wigan, Stockport, Salford,  Tameside,  Oldham, Trafford &  Bury know alot more about aviation then Boris Johnson does at present. It’s potentially a game changer for increasing airport capacity in the South East, as well as it gives them a good base from which to put up firm proposals. The mayor of London certainly does not have that at all. 

At the last Transport Committee l asked the mayor’s adviser on aviation, Councillor Daniel Moylan whether it had occurred to the Mayor to have made a bid for Stansted, as we heard for the first time about the MAG bid? I was told that was commerically confidential!  My blog at the time suggested it was an example of municipal capitalism coming down to London but I am not sure it was ever seriously considered by them. 

The Mayor quite honestly would have been better off buying Stansted for £1.5 billion like our colleagues in local government of Greater Manchester, rather than chasing Arab shiekhs for some loose change of up to £80 billion for far fetched ideas like the Thames Estuary airport.  There are rumours he will soon go to the Middle East for backers for his aviation ideas. 

So in short Manchester local authorities can teach Boris a thing or two about the aviation business. Thus the Mayor would be better off taking the train to Manchester then a flight to the Middle East!

Reacting to the comments, Murad Qureshi AM, London Labour Assembly Environment spokesperson said:

“The comments made by the Mayor’s environment adviser show how ludicrous Boris’s position is. Rather than taking concrete steps to tackle air pollution in London, he is now telling children not to play outside. After 5 years in office, Boris has utterly failed on air pollution. The capital is still among the worst cities in Europe for poor air and, as a result, over 4,000 lives are lost prematurely every year in our city.

“Rather than tackling the problem now, Boris has announced a wish list of proposals that wouldn’t come into effect for another seven years. He has also rowed back on plans to introduce phase 5 of the Low Emissions Zone. In the Labour Group amendment to the Mayor’s budget we provided costed plans to buy an additional 50 Hybrid buses and to move forward with a complete programme of fleet modernisation, which would include a pilot study of all electric vehicles.”

Ends

Notes

1.    Murad Qureshi is a Labour London-wide Assembly Member. He chairs the London Assembly’s Health and Environment Committee.

2.    The Mayor’s Adviser’s comments can be found at http://www.lbc.co.uk/london-pollution-so-bad-children-should-be-kept-inside-68118

The London Assembly required a two-thirds majority to amend the Mayor’s budget. At the first meeting the three opposition groups passed a “˜Technical Amendment’ which forced Boris to review freezing the council tax precept, rather than cutting it by one penny a day for an average household. This would raise £9.6 million, which could be used to keep all of London’s fire stations open and maintain police front counter provision across London.

This would have:

• Kept Westminster and Knightsbridge fire stations open

• Helped 135 Westminster residents and 100 Hounslow residents under 24 and out of work for more than a year into work through Labour’s Jobs Guarantee. This scheme would give 21 hours per week of work experience, paid at the London Living Wage for six months.

• Saved West London residents, travelling from Zone 4 to Zone 1, £282.74 a year by cutting transport fares by 1% so they are in line with inflation

Labour London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi said:

“It is clear that the Mayor of London’s cuts are too far and too fast. Boris had a clear choice between cutting council tax by one pence a day, or freezing it and using the money to keep fire stations such as Westminster and Knightsbridge open. But Boris chose to carry on with his foolish plan to axe 12 fire stations and 18 fire engines. 

“Boris is needlessly jeopardising the safety and security of Londoners. We presented the Mayor with a fully costed plan which keeps much needed front line services but he wants to continue with his ill-thought out proposals.

“Boris has cut his share of the council tax by one pence a day per household, but at the same time has whacked up fares above inflation for the fifth year running. If he had taken on our budget proposal to cut transport fares by one per cent he could have saved residents in Zone 4 and travelling to Zone 1 £282.74 over the course of a year. It’s time for Boris to get serious and stand up for Londoners instead of campaigning for tax cuts for millionaires.”

Ends

Notes

1.    Murad Qureshi is a London wide Assembly Member.

2.    The cross-party amendment can be found here: http://cityhalllabour.org/cross-party-budget-change-forces-boris-to-ditch-frontline-999-cuts/

3.    The Budget meeting took place at City Hall on Monday 25th February 2013. You can watch the meeting here: www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/the-london-assembly/webcasts

For more information please contact Press and Research Officer Sophie Kimber, on 020 7983 5639. Number not for publication.

The Jobs Guarantee would give 21 hours per week of work experience, paid at the London Living Wage for six months. This is one of the key measures in the London Assembly Labour Group’s amendment to the Mayor’s draft 2013-14 budget for London. The amendment and proposals focus on protecting frontline services, easing the cost of living crisis and helping young Londoners into work. 

The Mayor’s Draft Budget and the London Assembly Labour Group’s alternative proposals will be debated and voted on for a second and final time on Monday at City Hall.

In Westminster, the number of people under 24 out of work for more than a year is:

·         135 young people in January 2013

·         115 young people in January 2012

Labour London wide Assembly Member, Murad Qureshi AM said:”Boris may shrug his shoulders and say he is doing all he can, but he is signed up to the government’s reckless economic plans. All he has done is said the “˜rhetoric should be toned down’, but that cuts and austerity should continue. At a time when ordinary Londoners are struggling and the economy is flat-lining he must do more, there is an alternative.

"The Mayor needs to offer a solution for young Londoners who continue to be affected by this jobs crisis. I want to see him make a commitment to long-term adults to guarantee them a job if they’ve been out of work for more than 12 months.

“By offering a Jobs Guarantee the Mayor could help get 135 Londoners under 24 years into work in Westminster and 7,200 long-term unemployed young Londoners across the capital. ”

The key points of the Labour Group’s proposals are:

 Â·         A Jobs Guarantee for all 16-24 year olds who have been out of work for 1 year or more

·         Cut transport fares by 1% so they are in line with inflation

·         Re-allocate business rates to protect frontline police and fire services

·         Freeze the Mayor’s share of the Council Tax

·         Start the process of setting up a London-wide lettings agency

Ends

Notes

1.   Murad Qureshi is a London wide Assembly Member.

2.    The background note below provides more information on each proposal.

3.    Unemployment figures for January 2013 were released today and are available at www.nomisweb.co.uk

 For more information please contact Labour Group Press Officer Sophie Kimber on 020 7983 5639. Number not for publication.

Background

Jobs Guarantee

Working closely with appropriate employers the Jobs Guarantee would provide participants with 21 hours work per week paid at the London Living Wage. This proposal would see £35.6 million invested in 2013-14 to finance the scheme, including wages and employer’s NI contributions.

 The Jobs Guarantee will help prevent another “˜lost generation’ of unemployed young people, it will generate up to £27 million for HM Treasury through increased National Insurance payments, reducing the Job Seekers’ Allowance payments and through the VAT generated by the purchase of consumer goods by participants of the scheme.

 Protecting frontline Police services

Following central government’s 20% cut to the policing budget the frontline is now being hit. The Mayor has chosen not to allocate any more resources to the police, even though he has the ability to do so. He is planning to cut police numbers, cut front counters and decimate Safer Neighbourhood Teams. The budget amendment proposal is designed to cushion the impact of central government cuts.

The proposals would:

·         Recruit 1,159 PCSOs ““ both improving uniformed presence on our streets and creating a pool for future recruitment of police constables

·         Maintain the current level of front counter services across London

·         Recruit 250 new police officers for Safer Transport Teams

 Protecting frontline Fire services

Freezing the Mayoral precept will retain £9.4 million this year which will be used to keep all 12 fire stations and 18 fire appliances that are earmarked for the axe. This will maintain the current level of fire cover for London.

Reallocation of business rates

This proposal would allocate the recently-localised funds from Retained Business Rates in a way that protects the public services that Londoners depend upon and finances projects that help secure a sustainable economic, infrastructure, and environmental future for London.

 “˜Rogue’ landlords and lettings agencies

This proposal would invest in a GLA “˜know your rights’ website for tenants in collaboration with charities and think-tanks.  Secondly, proposes the financing of an action research project in to the establishment of a London-wide lettings agency. Thirdly, propose the commission of an extensive study into the feasibility of a London Living Rent.

” …..you just might have a point here, Murad “

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson is clearly a literate man as his weekly Daily Telegraph column and array of books can testify. However, l am not sure about his numeracy skills given his recent ‘adjustment’ of the figures for the number of Metropolitan police officers. 

The latest debacle from Boris has come in the form of misleading police numbers. Having had his Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, Stephen Greenhalgh, travel to every borough to sell his draft Police and Crime Plan at consultation meetings, it has transpired that the police figures the Mayor and his office were using were not the actual figures but been “adjusted”. This has called into question the accuracy of the information given to residents on the number of police officers that work and are forecast to work within their borough.

Boris and his team either know that these figures are wrong and are deliberately misleading the public, or they are not capable of understanding the police force they are in charge of. Both are equally worrying. If these figures are incorrect then the Mayor’s entire consultation with Londoners is fundamentally flawed.

It is vitally important that the information given to people is absolutely watertight and there is no confusion. It looks like the Mayor is not comparing like with like, and is making a cut in police officers for over half of London’s boroughs look like an increase.

Transparency is vital to building public trust which Boris will need if his plan to close 65 police stations and front counters comes to fruition. If the Mayor cannot explain where his figures have come from then what confidence can we, or Londoners, have about his future plans?

In search of clarification, the Labour Group has referred the matter to the UK Statistics Authority for their opinion as to whether the figures currently used by the Mayor for his London-wide consultation are accurate. Currently, police officer numbers are publically available on the Mayor’s own London Datastore. This is what we were referred to when we approached the Mayor for information on police numbers. Yet, these are not the figures being used by the Mayor.

In the meantime, Boris continues to pontificate to the public from his main source of income, his £250,000 a-year column in the Daily Telegraph, which he describes as “chicken feed”. Most recently he has been preaching about the injustices of the Government’s mansion tax proposals whilst making a grab for stamp duty in London to fund further housing developments in Greater London. All this when he could be doing a lot more with the money and power he already has.

For all of Boris’s talk about tightening our belt buckles in this time of austerity, he has blown London’s reserves. He balances the budget for the Greater London Authority by using money to cover running costs that was left to pay off debt. Indeed, the GLA has reserves of £244 million over the next three years, so the majority his proposed cuts would be passed on to the next Mayor of London. Boris is planning on spending the reserves which will leave his successor with a massive funding gap. But by that point, Boris will be making moves to be a tenant in Number 10 Downing Street.

On the basis of what l have seen recently, Boris needs to get back to school and focus on his math’s skills. Clearly an education at Eton is not all it cracked up to be.

This blog was published in Tribune edition of the 22nd of February – 7th of March 2013.

Hearing about some of the difficulties in setting up solar panels from Brixton Energy Co-op.

In Greater London we consume 13 per cent of the national energy supply whilst only contributing 2 per cent of its production. This is something we established during an investigation by the Environment Committee on Plugging the Energy Gap in London, released in December 2011. I had this foremost in my mind as l heard the news coverage yesterday of the outgoing CEO of OFGEM (the regulator of the energy sector in the UK) Alaistar Buchanan’s comments on the UK being “on the brink” of an energy crisis and that households should be prepared for a sharp rise in energy bills within two years as Britain comes “dangerously close to power shortages”.

More than a year ago, we warned a gap in energy supplies could impact on customers’ bills in London. So in the report we called on the government to support London’s efforts to generate more of its own heat and power. We press for district heating schemes, which can efficiently heat thousands of homes, to be eligible for existing subsidies, and local generation projects being set up in the capital to be part of back-up plans for electricity supply shortfalls.

Furthermore l was enthused by a visit to Brixton Energy Co-op on Monday, but was concerned by the unnecessary barriers stopping more local community owned schemes, like their solar panels schemes, being rolled out. I was at Mr Buchanan’s speech and was disappointed that important initiatives, such as Brixton Energy, that increase local energy supplies were very much vacant from his suggestions on how to plug the energy gap.

Murad Qureshi AM is today backing calls for the UK Statistics Authority’s opinion as to whether the figures currently being used by the Mayor for his London-wide consultation on the future of the Metropolitan Police are accurate. Currently, information on the number of police officers is made publicly available through the Mayor’s London Datastore but this information differs from that being used by the Mayor in his public consultation.

London Assembly Labour Policing spokesperson Joanne McCartney, has today written to the UK Statistics Authority seeking clarification.

The figures published by the Mayor on his website and separately in the Policing Consultation for Hounslow:

·         The Mayor says police strength was 472 in 2011

·         The Mayor’s London Datastore says police strength was 495 in 2011

·         The Mayor forecasts police strength will increase by 74 in 2015

·         The Mayor’s London Datastore forecasts police strength will increase by 51 in 2015

Labour Londonwide Assembly Member Murad Qureshi AM said:

“We know that 41 police officers have been lost since May 2010 in Hounslow and 2,208 police officers have been lost already across <city w:st=”on”><place w:st=”on”>London</place></city>. According to the Mayor we will be getting 74 by 2015 to replace some of those that have been lost. In fact it looks like we’ll get 51 more by 2015.

“It now appears Boris’s plans for the future of the Metropolitan Police are based on dodgy stats. Boris either knows these figures are wrong or is deliberately misleading the public.

“Residents have been consulted by Boris on the future of policing in Hounslow. It is vitally important that the information given to people is absolutely watertight and there is no confusion. We need to get to the bottom of what is going on as transparency is vital to building public trust in this whole process.

“If the Mayor cannot explain where his figures have come from then what confidence can Londoners, have in his future plans? I am backing calls for the UK Statistics Authority to investigate so we can get to the bottom of this.”

Ends

Notes

1.      Murad Qureshi is a Londonwide Assembly Member.

2.      A table explaining the difference in the Mayor’s claims can be found here:<shapetype coordsize=”21600,21600″ o:spt=”75″ o:preferrelative=”t” path=”m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe” filled=”f” stroked=”f” id=”_x0000_t75″> <stroke joinstyle=”miter”></stroke><formulas><f eqn=”if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0″></f><f eqn=”sum @0 1 0″></f><f eqn=”sum 0 0 @1″></f><f eqn=”prod @2 1 2″></f><f eqn=”prod @3 21600 pixelWidth”></f><f eqn=”prod @3 21600 pixelHeight”></f><f eqn=”sum @0 0 1″></f><f eqn=”prod @6 1 2″></f><f eqn=”prod @7 21600 pixelWidth”></f><f eqn=”sum @8 21600 0″></f><f eqn=”prod @7 21600 pixelHeight”></f><f eqn=”sum @10 21600 0″></f></formulas><path o:extrusionok=”f” gradientshapeok=”t” o:connecttype=”rect”></path><lock v:ext=”edit” aspectratio=”t”></lock></shapetype><shape o:ole=”” type=”#_x0000_t75″ style=”WIDTH: 1in; HEIGHT: 56.25pt” id=”_x0000_i1025″><imagedata src=”file:///C:DOCUME~1NsalihLOCALS~1Tempmsohtml11clip_image001.wmz” o:title=””></imagedata></shape>

3.      Joanne McCartney’s letter to the UKSA can be found here:<shape o:ole=”” type=”#_x0000_t75″ style=”WIDTH: 1in; HEIGHT: 56.25pt” id=”_x0000_i1026″> <imagedata src=”file:///C:DOCUME~1NsalihLOCALS~1Tempmsohtml11clip_image003.wmz” o:title=””></imagedata></shape>

 Boris Johnson is currently overseeing one the biggest cuts programmes of London’s emergency services since their inception. The Metropolitan Police is set to lose 65 police stations and front counters. The London Fire Brigade is under pressure to close 12 fire stations, cut 18 fire engines and axe 520 fire fighters. Up to eight Accident and Emergency departments are at risk in the capital. And the London Ambulance Service is being cut by £53 million and losing 590 frontline staff.

Boris’s recent advice at Davos was to “junk the rhetoric of austerity and be confident” yet his policies in London paint an extremely bleak picture of cuts, cuts and more cuts. He thinks Londoners should obey the old adage of ‘keep calm and carry on’ but there is wide-ranging opposition to his planned closures which he can not ignore.

The Mayor may shrug his shoulders and say he is doing all he can, but the simple truth is that he isn’t. Where is the alternative that could benefit hard-working Londoners choosing between food, fuel or rent? Boris is actively embracing austerity. At a time when ordinary Londoners are struggling and the economy is flat-lining he must do more.

Boris has already grabbed £34 million this year from Londoner’s pockets with his unnecessary fare increase. On Boris’s watch we’ve seen bus fares rise by 50 per cent and weekly travel cards by 20 per cent. The Mayor has the power to bear down on fare rises and put money back in Londoners pockets but it has been above-inflation fare rise upon above-inflation fare rise every year since he was elected. His plan is for that pattern to continue for the next four years.

Top of Boris’s list at Davos was to build more housing but London’s affordable housing budget has been cut by nearly 70 per cent from 2011. Between April and September 2012 only 425 new affordable homes were started in the capital.

Boris’s arrogance knows no bounds. He’s most recent appointee, Andrew Gilligan, has been made his Cycling Tsar but has no experience of making transport or cycling policy. Gilligan joins Veronica Wadley, Gerard Lyons and Ray Lewis who have all been appointed by the Mayor in the last few months. So far that’s £280,000 of taxpayers money on jobs for his friends.

At a time when he is cutting the London Fire Brigade’s budget by £45 million, raising transport fares for the fifth year running as well as closing police stations across London, you might assume he would be practicing frugality. Unfortunately, London’s Mayor is more likely to boasting about how he earns more then the Prime Minister, to the Prime Minister. If Boris is genuine about fighting against the rhetoric and practice of austerity, he’ll need to do an awful lot more than call for a tax cut for millionaires and give jobs to his buddies.

 This City Hall Watch column was published in Tribune edition for 8-21st Feb