Westminster Council not so bike friendly

2 Replies
Judging by some of the figures which emerged from yesterday’s London Assembly Transport Committee meeting, which reviewed the Barclays Cycle Hire Scheme, the Guardian editorial (11th of October) appears to have been in haste.   The Committee heard that whilst Transport for London have 94,000 registered users and despite reaching the 1 million journey mark, we need to be sceptical. To date the scheme has 315 docking stations, some 21% down on the target of 400 and consequently only 4,138 bikes out of a total 6,000 available for hire, (31% down from the original target).  Consequently, the shortage of docking stations impacts detrimentally in meeting actual daily demand for 13,600 journeys, (which incidentally is still not as high as the original business case estimate which put daily demand at 30,000 in the first year; 55% less then actual demand).
 
It also became apparent that the problem of the lack of docking stations, could be parked right outside the doorstep of Westminster Council. It appears they’ve been a major obstacle to the successful rolling out of the scheme and therefore, its future success.   A summary of sites refused planning revealed that a staggering 40% (33 out of a total of 82 ) of planning applications for bike docking stations were refused by their planning committee and one half of the total number of withdrawn applications (3 out of 6) also derived from within its boundaries. Not surprisingly, therefore, not only is there a chronic shortage of docking stations, Westminster’s approach has meant that the scheme is failing to meet the demand for bikes by about 30%. Its still early days to make a comprehensive judgment upon the success of the hire scheme, but clearly the City of Westminster is not helping to achieve it’s long term sustainable success.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Richmond to lose nine Police Officers over the next three years

Leave a Reply

Up to nine officers could be lost from Richmond’s police force as budgets tighten.

The Metropolitan Police Authority is set to recruit 900 fewer officers by next year than previously planned, it was revealed in their quarterly report.

The cuts in recruitment means nine police officers could be lost from the borough’s police force over the next three years.

The neighbouring borough of Kingston could also face losing nine officers, while Hounslow police could be forced to carry out its work with 14 fewer police officers.

London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi said the cuts were unfair and warned the police could have to choose which crimes they tackle with the reduced resources.

He said: “The country’s finances obviously mean tough choices have to be made but when it comes down to having to choose between tackling violence or burglary, it’s there for all to see what the government’s cuts really mean.

“People round here didn’t cause the financial crisis yet they are being expected to take the hit for it.”

Richmond’s borough commander Chief Superintendent Clive Chalk declined to comment.  View full article

Football clubs should learn to share

2 Replies

The idea of London based football clubs moving around is a familiar one. Millwall moved from the Isle of Dogs to south of the river and Arsenal from Greenwich to Highbury so why not Spurs from North London to East London?  This story, comes as no surprise to me, in that the option of a move to Stratford is fast becoming the first choice for Tottenham Hotspur given the uncertainty of staying at their existing site with a new stadium.

As I’ve said in a previous blog, l can see no reason why the Olympic Stadium can’t be shared by two clubs as l witnessed at the Stadio Olimpico in Rome.   Both local teams, Roma & Lazio manage to play with their vast and fanatical fan base on alternate weekends on a pitch around a running track.  (Alas both clubs have not seen the virtue of this!)  My concern is, that as an away fan, getting to White Hart Lane is murder, (as I suggested in a  report  to the Transport Committee which investigated the issue of sports travel)  so I’d much rather travel somewhere like Stratford, which will no doubt be much better connected than Tottenham after the games.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

More power to Mayor’s elbow – now let’s make him Labour

Leave a Reply

While the Labour has been busy electing its new leader and the party’s candidate for London mayor, Boris Johnson has been seeking to get more powers from central government.  He proposes to do away with the Metropolitan Police Authority, which scrutinises and holds the police to account. He wants more powers over housing and rail transport. He also seeks the abolition of the London Development Agency and more direct control of the Thames and royal parks.

There has been little debate about these new arrangements during the campaign to decide who will take on Boris in 2012, but Ken Livingstone is sure to give them serious thought when developing his manifesto.

Despite the new proposals, the powers of London’s Mayor are still limited compared with those enjoyed by the mayors of other major world cities. Whatever David Cameron and his ministers may say about localism, they are still reluctant to let go of too much power. It’s a common enough trait in central government. Tony Blair’s Government was far too cautious when it returned devolved power to London 15 years after Margaret Thatcher abolished the GLC.

The situation in Britain now is that the administrations of Wales and Scotland have more powers devolved to them than London, even though London is far larger than either in terms of both its population and the size of its economy.

The litmus test for many is whether the Mayor can get more powers over London’s finances. At present, just 7 per cent of the Mayor’s income comes from his share of London council tax, compared with 50 per cent in New York and more than 80 per cent in Tokyo. If the capital could get more revenue-raising power, the role of the Mayor (already dubbed the third most powerful position in British politics) could really be developed.

Boris may well be negotiating for these new powers just as his transport and policing budgets face up to 40 per cent cuts. Doubtless the Tory incumbent would be reluctant to preside over this. It would at least offer the prospect of Londoners being able to cover the cost of Government spending cuts through their Mayor.

The various local authorities and the London Assembly have already signed off most of the changes currently going through in London. The challenge now is to make sure the beneficiary of these new powers – and any others in the future – is Ken Livingstone as Labour Mayor in May 2012.  While his job won’t be as powerful as those of his New York and Parisian equivalents, the new settlement is a step towards making the Mayor of London more independent of central government. That can only be a good thing for London and everyone who genuinely supports localism.

Murad Qureshi is a Labour member of the London Assembly.

Click here to view the full Tribune article

Focus suddenly on private tenants

1 Reply
Last Thursday evening, I attended a meeting held by The Camden Federation of Private Tenants (CFPT) in Swiss Cottage Library (an old haunt of mine, where l did my A levels).  Now, anyone who knows anything about housing in central London, will be aware, how ignored this particular sector of private tenants are.  However as the issue of caps on levels of Housing Benefit continue to rumble on in London, suddenly, this sector of housing provision has been thrown into the spot light..
 
The emergency budget in June, proposed putting a cap on the maximum Local Housing Allowance (LHA) of 30% of the median, locally. So, the maximum LHA for a 4 bed dwelling in Camden will be £400 per week and £250 for a one bed.  These measures have been introduced on the back of a handful of abuses of the system highlighted in the press and not any measured and calm debate about the system and the changes it really needs or the potential impact on the area set to be affected the most – London.
  
Those in favour have suggested that landlords would absorb these reductions, however, a survey of landlord’s responses to these changes by The London Council suggests otherwise. ( http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/housing/briefings/landlordsurvey.htm )  This survey states that 60% of landlords said they would not lower the rent by any amount if the tenant could not pay their rent in full.  Even more worryingly, if the shortfall in rent is over £20 per week, almost all landlords said they would evict the tenant or not renew the tenancy at the end of the period, and over a quarter of them said they would decrease the number of properties made available to those in receipt of housing benefit, all of which would serve to accentuate the problem, reduce supply and increase rents further.  London Councils estimate that the net result of these changes would be that some 82,000 households in the capital could lose their homes.
 
Some members of the audience were in favour of rent controls being extended further throughout the sector.  As it happens, Ken has also come out in favour of such rent control extension, reminiscent of the era when rent officers at the local housing benefit office had powers to determine rent levels locally (http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/housing-management/livingstone-i’ll-cap-private-rents/6511873.article) as a means for the treasury keeping a grip on housing benefit and households claiming it. 
 
The LHA was not the only issue that dominated the evening, as the discussion moved onto the issue of Crown Estate sell offs in central London, particularly Cumberland Market which again are a threat to security of tenure for tenants.
 
All of this, set against a backdrop from the biggest threat to security of tenure for council tenants, which was made by the PM, when he suggested that it should no longer be regarded as a right for life.  Not forgetting, the unaccountability of the many “not so social” Housing Associations in London which have become the favoured agents for solving the social housing conundrum, all of which make for a very uneven playing field for council and housing association tenants who face an uncertain future.
 
Luckily, there are at least, organisations out there like CFPT which do an excellent job of representing private tenants.  CFPT represent tenants not only in Camden but also in other boroughs in central London like the City of Westminster and Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea making them a very deserving candidate for Londonwide funding and not just from within Camden.  l’ll certainly be keeping in touch with them, so long may their campaigning and representation work continue
 
This is one which won’t go away in these austere times. So watch this space!  
 

We did it in 1908 & 1948 why not in 2012?

Leave a Reply

Runners leaving Wembley at the start of the 1948 Olympic marathon

Following a host of objections from MPs and east end local authorities, the controversy over the Olympic marathon route simply refuses to go away. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23884085-angry-eastenders-accuse-coe-of-betrayal-over-2012-marathon-route.do, Lord Coe and LOCOG need to ask themselves, exactly “when have the Olympics had a marathon which doesn’t end at the Olympic stadium”? (with the exception of Athens 2004 for very good historical reasons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_2004_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men’s_marathon.) And even more importantly, why should it be any different in London for 2012? Our road networks and infrastructures are supposed to be at their best in the 21st century and one of the greatest traditions of the games should not be abandoned simply due to logistical challenges. It reflects very badly on LOCOG, that other host cities have managed this sort of logistical difficulty in the past, including London way back in 1908 and 1948! If it can be done in London in previous ocassions why not in 2012 ?

Finish line at 1908 Olympic marathon games London

 

TfL fringe meeting @ Labour Party Conference 2010

Leave a Reply
During our conference in Manchester, l was a panelist at a fringe meeting organised by TfL on London’s transport upgrade and Britain’s future growth.  It gave me an opportunity to say a few home truths.  However, first, I began with congratulating the Mayor and TfL for the nationalisation of the PPP and in particular, for bringing the tube line’s PPP contract back in house, last June.  
 
That said l expressed concerns on some of the project management of these upgrades, and in particular the disparity between some lines. Why is it, for example, that the newest extension to the tube on the Jubilee line, is attracting so much more time, energy and investment with its signal renewal contract than its oldest counterpart which runs between Farringdon & Paddington?  This section of the underground (in particular Edgware tube) is home to a signal box dating back to 1928 and still uses levers to get trains through the station! The rightful place for this piece of equipment is in a museum and not as a mechanism on a very busy part of one the busiest networks in the world. 
 
Crossrail (not unexpectedly) got support from across the whole of the panel, however, concerns were voiced on how it would fare after  the comprehensive spending review later this month. I emphasised the critical role it will play in the regeneration of localities like Southall & Hayes in West London and how in the latter case we should not be held to ransom by BAA who own the rail tracks into Heathrow.
 
Buses in London are probably one of the best loved part of our public transport infrastructure.  This is judging by the growth in the numbers of bus passengers since 2000 with 2.25 billion passenger journeys made last year, similar to the levels we had in 1962.  Critically, three quarters of the bus network serves outer London and has usage across the social spectrum, and even has the Marylebone Cricket Club members using it. Yet net bus subsidy for London will decline by almost 40% in real terms by 2017/18 due to the Mayor’s decision to shift the burden from the tax payer to the fare payer.
 
Finally on the issue of fares and the Mayor’s 2011 fare decision. He has specific powers to set fares in London making the decision a political one based in part upon the advice by TfL which indicate the revenues it requires.  The usual formula is the Retail Price Index (RPI) plus 2% which TfL work towards.  However last year, even when RPI was minus 1.4%, the Mayor imposed a 3.9% increase on the tube fares and 12.7% on the buses. The relevant RPI rate is 5.1%, so we can expect at least an inflation busting 7% plus increase in fares. This estimate does not take account of the estimated lost revenue of between £50-70 million from the west extension of the congestion charge, which will no doubt add to the financial woes of the Mayor.  The moral is, be prepared to be hit very hard by the Mayor at the beginning of the New Year.
 

Update London airports expansion!

1 Reply

Myself with Dot & Barry Palmer

It’s not often you get to go to a community victory celebration, but there was one recently in Sipson Gardens    http://www.demotix.com/hub/heathrow  where the villages around Heathrow were celebrating a victory against all the odds in stopping the Heathrow expansion.  The following weekend (4th of Sept), l joined a demo http://tinyurl.com/2cxzmzm at London City Airport where a similar plight is being faced by local residents.

I have, in the past made the point that the Mayor supports the expansion on paper http://tinyurl.com/2u7hwdp. He also considered a report to that effect http://tinyurl.com/2aec9js. This is despite a public meeting on the 18th of January this year at a pseudo-PQT in Ilford when, following my insistence requesting his intervention, he stated that he was not the planning authority and did not think he could reverse the decision. When further pressed by the public audience, he eventually agreed to push for a public consultation using the phase “consider me lobbied”. Since then, l’ve raised a motion at the London Assembly (passed unanimously on the 24th of Feb 2010) asking the Mayor to review the increased flights at City Airport. http://tinyurl.com/34tpzlq. This was a timely demo given that BA have since, revealed their intention to introduce long-haul flights at city airport http://tinyurl.com/397hxz8 and also in view of the near miss over London’s sky when a private jet from city airport nearly collided with a Heathrow plane http://tinyurl.com/39dr6lv

Watch this space for the latest developments on London city airport!