Murad Qureshi, chair of the London Assembly environment committee, said the mayor’s strategy would not help SMEs dispose of their waste more effectively.

Johnson last week outlined a series of targets for the capital in his Municipal Waste and Business Waste Strategies. The goals included no waste to landfill within 14 years and a recycling target of 60% by 2031.

But Qureshi said: “The mayor’s strategy recognises that business waste is predominantly collected and managed privately by waste contractors; it also mentions the escalating cost of landfill tax. But it fails to effectively link the waste stream from small business to the infrastructure which already exists for household recycling. 

“The strategy should do much more to enable small and medium sized businesses with fewer resources to access suitable waste and recycling services in their local area.”

The London Assembly Labour Group says small businesses should be allowed to use household waste and recycling centres in their areas.

Click here to view article

The strategy, entitled ‘Making business sense of waste’, was published on November 18 (see letsrecycle.com story). It aims to tackle London’s increasing problem of business waste, both from the commercial and industrial (C&I) and construction, demolition and excavation (CDE) industries.

Murad Qureshi claims that former Labour Mayor Ken Livingstone’s business waste strategy included more actions for councils

But, Labour London Assembly member Murad Qureshi said: “It fails to effectively link the waste stream from small business to the infrastructure which already exists for household recycling.

“The strategy should do much more to enable small and medium sized businesses with fewer resources to access suitable waste and recycling services in their local area,” he added.

Strategy

In the strategy the Mayor states that he will help businesses, of any size, to overcome the practical issues surrounding waste separation to encourage recycling, but the strategy does not spell out how this will be achieved.

It states: “The Mayor’s actions are, therefore, focused around helping businesses, especially small and medium-sized enterprises, to access reuse, recycling and composting collections or entering into collective contracting for these services.”

However the strategy does recognise that access to these services is a problem, particularly for SMEs. Quoting research by the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) the strategy states that there is an “appetite among smaller businesses for waste minimisation and recycling activities” but that due the economies of scale many are unable to take advantage of waste and recycling contracts.

Now, Mr Qureshi is calling for small businesses to be allowed access to household waste and recycling centres in their areas as this could be implemented quickly and would provide the businesses with greater access to these services.

Councils have been reluctant in the past to offer waste services to businesses because under the Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme, they have had to send a decreasing amount of waste to landfill each year or face financial penalties. However, under the Government’s Review of Waste Policy in England 2011 the government is proposing to abolish LATS from 2013.

Mr Qureshi stated that on average only 18% of businesses benefit from local authority waste collections and it is often considerably less. For example, he said that in Hounslow less than 3% of businesses benefit from council waste collections, while the boroughs of Brent and Kingston currently offered no commercial waste collection service at all.

Commitment

Last month the government launched a ‘Local Authority Business Recycling and Waste Collection Commitment’ to set out best practice principles for local authorities running trade waste services (see letsrecycle.com story). It is a voluntary commitment that aims to improve businesses’ access to waste and recycling collections.

The scheme includes a pledge to provide reliable and regular services and to provide businesses, in particular SMEs, with advice on waste prevention, the reuse of goods and how they can access household waste recycling sites. 

An independent Westbourne Green bed maker is gearing up for a David versus Goliath battle with Crossrail to stop its site being bulldozed next year.

Big Table has had both its shop and workshop located on Great Western Road for almost 30 years but employees were shocked when Crossrail representatives walked into the store in June and served it with a compulsory purchase order to take over the site within three months.

The repossession was later delayed until next January but Crossrail have confirmed their plans to build a large electrical substation on the site.

Almost 100 people attended an emergency public meeting last week to discuss saving the bed and mattress maker with a 2,000-signature petition already collected in support of the business.

London Assembly member Murad Qureshi says local concerns have not been taken onboard by Crossrail.

Speaking at the meeting, he said: “It’s a rare local manufacturing business and I am very proud to say that one of the few things that I have in my home that is made in London is my mattress from Big Table.

“The building has already survived the Westway being built over it so I would like to think it can survive Crossrail.”

The business, which secured a 40-year lease in 1982, employs seven staff and is in the process of recruiting two young trainee apprentices. Its main building on Great Western Road dates back to 1901 and local residents argue the building is part of the area’s heritage.

Crossrail recently came up with a plan for Big Table to retain the shop building until 2013 with Network Rail occupying the rest of the site. It would then take control of the whole site from 2013.

Big Table director Stephen Bond said: “The Crossrail guys talk as though they are the law of the land. It seems as thought they can do what they want. If we were to leave there’s no chance of finding premises like this in a suitable part of London.”

A Crossrail spokeswoman said: “Crossrail is sensitive to Big Table’s concerns and has offered for the business to remain in its existing shop building until 2013 which would also enable Network Rail land behind the shop to be used in support of essential Crossrail tunnelling works from January 2012.

“Crossrail continues to work closely with Big Table to secure suitable alternative business premises.”

Click here to view article

Protestors call on Crossrail to spare local heritage landmark from demolition

This morning l joined the local community in Paddington & North Kensington to protest against the closure of the “Big Table” bed shop which is located in the neighbourhood l grew up in. 

I’ve been a supporter of Crossrail but did not expect it to cost local jobs and devour a local landmark like the Big Table (56 Great Western Road, W9) which has resided on this site for many years.  Crossrail have had more then 20 years to sort these issues out and therefore, decisions which affect real lives, livelihoods and local businesses should not be left until just a few months before the tunnelling begins proper in March 2012 at Royal Oak.  A conventional planning application to the local council setting out their plans for the electrical sub-station on the site would have afforded sufficient opportunity and time for all parties concerned to deal with the issues and the proposals.  Instead, plans are railroaded through using the powers of the Crossrail Act. 

In addition we also have the tunnel lining being transported into theRoyal Oak portal via the Great Western Road by lorry.  We were originally led to believe it would come in by rail.   

It was for this reason that I decided to  “go to the mattresses” with Crossrail this morning and to support calls to support local people, jobs and heritage.

Renewed hope for step free access at Greenford station in Ealing

One of the themes of my questioning recently of the Mayor both verbally and in writing has been to ask him about his broken promises on increased accessibility of our tube system, particularly with reference to the lack of lift access at many of our tube stations.

 l used two examples; the first revolved around Ealing tube stations.  At last weeks plenary we had Transport  for London in front of the London Assembly for questions and so I used the opportunity to highlight this issue.  l commented that while it was daft to have stopped the works on lifts at Greenford station at a huge cost, it is still worth looking at some more affordable alternative proposals for lifts put forward by Cllr Bassam Mafrouz (lead Member for Transport at Ealing Council).  Rather surprisingly the Mayor said he would consider them, (although his Transport Commissioner, Peter Hendy did not appear appear particularly keen).  Nonetheless, I hope Ealing Council can make the most of this renewed opportunity.

 My second question was prompted by the West Hamstead Amenity and Transport Group (WHAT),  I submitted a written question asking why there is no lift at West Hampstead tube given the works being done by Network Rail on the West Hampstead Thameslink stations?  This would not only aid passengers travelling to and from airports it connects to, it would also assist disabled people and those with pushchairs.  The response was a fairly standard one about the lack of funding but also made clear that for airport connections, other tube stations took priority, including Paddington (Hammersmitth & City line); Victoria (for Gatwick) and also stations at Tottenham Court Rd, Bond St and Bank.

So, although I managed to get some something from the Mayor with his promise to consider seriously the proposal from Cllr Bassam Mafrouz, I only got a rehash of policy spiel on lifts and budget prioritisation on West Hampstead, despite his acknowlement that it is a “strategic interchange” in his transport strategy.

London's largest electricity supplier needs to do more to help its customers

At the plenary last week, I received the full support of the London Assembly for my motion on the energy companies poor performance in London in dealing with fuel poverty. The motion was passed unanimously. For some time now, I’ve made the point that it won’t be the council tax or even the Mayor’s annual fare increases for Transport which hit family budgets the hardest, but it is the energy price hikes of up to 18 per cent which will make the biggest dent in household expenditure, especially for London households. This issue is further compounded by the postcode lottery which is also prevalent in the energy price market, as firms charge up to £180 more in some areas with the best deals to be found in Brighton, Bristol and Leeds. According to London Councils, we already have 1 in 4 households living in fuel poverty. In addition, we are warned (David Blair in FT 10.10.11) that if energy bills remain on their current path, the average household will be in fuel poverty by 2015. In 2008, the Environment Committee produced a report called “Lagging behind – Insulating homes in London”. This report noted then, the poor performance in London of insulating homes. We asked the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) to reconsider the rules around CERT (carbon emission reduction targets) in order to address the lower funding delivery in London, as part of the measures to bring forward measures to insulate the hard to treat homes. Therefore this is not a new problem, however, it has been compounded by the esculating fuel prices which are now disporportionate with household incomes.  As for the largest energy company in London, EDF, their performance has been lamentable. Even the industry journal “Uility Week” commented, that out of all the major energy suppliers, EDF achieved the second lowest proportion of its overall obligations in the third year of CERTs. This obliges suppliers to reduce carbon emissions by providing customers with measures such as loft insulation. Instead, we have seen a bombardment of energy efficient electric light bulbs landing on our doormat! Incidentally, the fourth year of the CERT programme ends on the 31st of March 2012 hence the adverts for insulation suddenly appearing in the Evening Standard. So while energy company shareholders are enjoying record profits, London consumers are getting fleeced. We desparately need DECC & OFGEM, the regulator, to take on the greed of the energy companies and to put the interests of London energy consumers first.

A motion agreed today said the amount of nitrogen dioxide in the capital’s air is higher than any other European capital city and recently published government plans show levels may not be reduced to legal limits until 2025.

Assembly Members said Londoners should not have to wait another decade for clean and healthy air to breathe.

In the absence of sufficient urgent action at national level, Members called for the Mayor to update his Air Quality Strategy to ensure that the capital’s air meets legal standards for nitrogen dioxide by 2015, at the latest.

Darren Johnson AM, who proposed the motion, said: “Improving London’s are quality is far more important than simply avoiding hefty EU fines, it’s about stopping the premature deaths of 4,000 people every year.

“If those 4,000 deaths a year were as a result of accidents on the tube or drowning in the Thames the Mayor and central government would feel compelled to act immediately. The fact that the poison in our air is invisible does not mean tackling poor air quality should be treated any less urgently.”

The motion was seconded by Murad Qureshi, AM, who added: “We should be ashamed that there are children growing up in London today who will never have fully developed lung capacity because of the pollution they are forced to breath every day. This issue is a real health emergency for London, if central government is slow to act then the Mayor must take a lead.”

The full text of the motion reads:

“The Assembly notes with concern that:

* London’s air has the highest average concentration of harmful nitrogen dioxide of any European capital city;

* The Mayor’s Air Quality Strategy relies on government delivering specific measures and funding to enable legal limits for nitrogen dioxide to be met in London by 2015; and

* In June 2011 the government published, for consultation, plans to address nitrogen dioxide pollution. The plans reveal that London’s air quality may not comply with legal limits until 2025.

“This Assembly considers that it is unacceptable for Londoners to have to wait a further ten years for clean and healthy air. In the absence of sufficient urgent action at national level, the Assembly calls on the Mayor to update his air quality strategy to include faster and stronger action in London to ensure that the capital’s air meets legal standards for nitrogen dioxide by 2015, at the latest.”

Click here to view article

In a motion agreed unanimously today, Members called on the Mayor to join the Assembly in pressing for a better deal for Londoners from national energy savings initiatives including CERT^{[2] and CESP[3].}

Murad Qureshi AM, who proposed the motion, said

"Household incomes are tumbling in real terms and it is not just those on fixed or low incomes that are going to be hard hit by high energy bills this winter. Recent levels of profits by energy companies along with the hikes in prices of up to 18 percent mean the average household energy bill could be £1200 a year.

"Energy companies have been underperforming on their obligations which could help Londoners living in fuel poverty and we need to get tough with them.

"The Mayor should use his influence to get them to improve their performance and ensure Londoners are not freezing to death this winter."

Victoria Borwick AM, who seconded the motion, said:

"Every year around 2700 people in the UK die because they are unable to heat cold homes and London is particularly affected by fuel poverty because of the high cost of living and the energy companies pushing up prices.

"London has received significantly less cavity and loft insulation that it should have done. Just four percent of homes in the capital have benefited from the CERT scheme and by the end of 2010 only four percent of CESP schemes were in London.

"The Mayor is looking to bring his influence to bear on this issue but energy companies should also step up to the plate to ensure London receives a better deal than it is currently getting"

The full text of the motion passed at today’s meeting reads as follows:

"Energy bills are rising relentlessly and many Londoners are facing falls in their real income. As the coalition government demands the energy companies do better for the UK, this Assembly demands a better deal for London in particular.

A recent investigation by the Assembly’s Health and Public Services Committee heard that London has repeatedly lost out under national energy saving initiatives and that as housing costs take a heavier toll on Londoners than those in the rest of the UK, this has pushed a disproportionate number of Londoners into fuel poverty.

We therefore call upon the Mayor to join with the Assembly in calling upon the six main UK energy suppliers to address this imbalance by fulfilling their CERT and CESP obligations equally across the UK and implement measures that ensure Londoners are no longer disproportionately in fuel poverty."

Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT)Community Energy Saving Programme (CESP). Watch the webcast.

As well as investigating issues that matter to Londoners, the London Assembly acts as a check and a balance on the Mayor.

Fuel poverty is defined as households spending more than 10 per cent of their disposable income on energy.

Read more about the

Read more about the

The motion was agreed unanimously at a meeting of the full Assembly today