Appendix 2
London Assembly (Mayor’s Question Time) – 12 October2017
Transcript of Agenda Item 5 – Questions to the Mayor
2017/4095 - The cost of Brexit Fiona Twycross AM
How much has the cost of living in London increased since the Brexit referendum?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Businesses across London and the rest of the United Kingdom rely on supply chains that stretch through Europe and around the world. A strong pound combined with unfettered access to goods and services across Europe have been instrumental in driving down costs for consumers in recent years. Since the referendum, however, the fall in the value of the pound has increased costs for many businesses, who have subsequently passed these costs on to customers by raising prices or reducing the size of their products while keeping prices the same. The continued drop in the value of the pound since the referendum has contributed to inflation rising from 0.5% to 2.9%, far above the Bank of England’s target of 2%. The UK now ranks top for inflation rates among the G7 [Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors of 7 countries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States of America]. There is no published data yet to establish a London-specific picture, but this inflation will inevitably be having an impact on the cost of living in the capital, with goods such as food and fuel increasing in cost.
This impacts most severely on the most disadvantaged Londoners and I am concerned that wages are not rising fast enough to offset this inflation. If UK businesses face new barriers to trade with the EU, this is only likely to further increase costs and prices, which is why I am advocating for the UK to remain a member of the single market. I am doing what I can to help ease the burden on Londoners. I am making public transport more affordable through my Hopper fare and TfL fares freeze, which will help Londoners access jobs, education and training. I am embarking on a programme of delivering genuinely affordable homes for Londoners and I am encouraging businesses to pay people a fair wage for a day’s work by signing up to the London Living Wage.
Tackling low pay and workplace inequality is one of my top priorities, and through my Good Work Standard, I will ensure that employees are supported to share and adopt best practice in employment standards. My Deputy Mayor, Joanne McCartney AM, has been working with the Living Wage Commission to ensure the analysis which determines the new London Living Wage rate to be announced next month reflects the increase in the cost of living that Londoners may now face.
Fiona Twycross AM: Thank you. In July, Labour Members launched a survey asking Londoners their views about Brexit and how the negotiations were going. It painted a picture of
people really not knowing what the Government was aiming for; there is widespread confusion over what the actual asks are for the Government. One of the things that came out quite strongly was exactly this point around the prices. The report is going to be published quite shortly, but I wanted to take the opportunity to highlight that 90% of respondents felt that prices had increased since the European Union (EU) referendum, and when weighted to the population in London, this equated to over three-quarters of Londoners. People are really starting to feel the Brexit squeeze - I recognise the work you have been doing in this area to push this agenda - and 71% of respondents also felt that wages had stagnated during the same period. This is all part of a picture in a city where the cost of living is already a major issue.
How confident are you with some of the points you raise around food prices rising and the cost of living? How confident are you that the Government is able to set aside party interests in the interests of the population? Obviously in our case we are particularly keen to push the interests of London, but I think that people are genuinely confused about where the Government is heading and it just feels like, in the midst of party arguments, the interests of the population are being lost.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am extremely worried about the course of Brexit negotiations. There will be a statement today from Michel Barnier [European Chief Negotiator for Brexit] and David Davis [The Rt Hon David Davis MP, Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union]. I have been quite clear in the regular meetings I have with David Davis about the concerns of Londoners. At the most recent meeting I took with me Professor Alice Gast, the President of Imperial [College London] and previously I have taken John Sorrell, [Co-chair of the Sorrell Foundation], who is involved in the creative industries sector. I am increasingly worried that, for political reasons, the deal that we are doing with the EU will not bear fruit that we need. I accept, by the way, we are leaving the EU.
I have got a view in relation to the timing of the Article 50 notice and the progress of discussions, but the Government has got to recognise the uncertainties do nobody any good; the plummeting pound is causing real problems in relation to the price of goods you referred to. Anybody who can afford to go on holiday overseas will have seen the consequence of the weak pound. Prices are going up; wages are not going up. Even if the pay cap is lifted, it is still below inflation, so it is a real terms pay cut. You will be aware from the research done by Trades Union Congress (TUC) and others, because of the pay cap over previous years, if you compare and contrast the wages of most people in London - public servants in particular - 2010 versus now, their wages have gone down.
2017/3896 - Refusing to Re-License Uber Andrew Boff AM
How much influence did you have on the decision not to re-license Uber?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you. The decision not to re-license Uber was made by TfL in line with its responsibilities as the licensing and regulatory authority for taxi and private hire services in London. I fully support TfL’s decision and I welcome the London
Assembly’s unanimous motion supportive of TfL’s decision. I was informed about the decision shortly before it was announced by TfL on 22 September. As the Mayor of London, I welcome innovative new companies that help Londoners by providing a better and more affordable service, but providing an innovative service is not an excuse for not following the rules. Regulation is there for a reason. I have been clear that all companies in London must play by the rules and adhere to the high standards Londoners expect.
Andrew Boff AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. You are quoted as saying that you did not think it was proper for politicians to interfere with a quasi-judicial matter. Is that correct?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes.
Andrew Boff AM: TfL issued a press release on 28 September, I think, which stated that because of your request, there would be a further meeting with Uber. Is that correct?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Because of the approach made by the global CEO of Uber after his apology to discuss with us, with TfL, how he can address the concerns, I asked the TfL Commissioner to make himself available to the global CEO to discuss how they could address the concerns TfL had raised.
Andrew Boff AM: So you considered it proper to interfere at one point, but improper to interfere at another point?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I do not think having discussions with the global CEO, who has apologised, is an improper use of the Commissioner’s time. I asked the Commissioner to make himself available. I am pleased that he did and I welcome the apology from the global CEO of Uber, which shows the reason why TfL made their decision.
Andrew Boff AM: As a result of that meeting, is the application by Uber now being reconsidered?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): No. Let me explain the procedure. You may not be aware. When TfL reaches a decision on a licence and rejects an application for a licence, the applicant can appeal, so Uber can appeal. I think it is 21 days. I presume Uber will be appealing and I suspect the legal appeal will take its course.
Andrew Boff AM: So during that 21-day period, you did intervene?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): No. Let me explain how it works; so the courts now will consider the appeal from Uber and of course TfL will defend the decision they made on 22 September.
Andrew Boff AM: Are you surprised that over 850,000 people have signed the petition that supports Uber being granted a new licence?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Uber is a very popular product used in London. Uber’s public relations (PR) department tells me 3.5 million Londoners use it, so of course I am not surprised that Londoners are unhappy with Uber not playing by the rules.
Andrew Boff AM: In what way did Uber not play by the rules?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The TfL decision on 22 September set out their concerns, that Uber were not a fit and proper private hire vehicle operator. There were four reasons given in the TfL decision which led them to conclude that they were worried about the safety and security of Londoners. I am happy for TfL to send you a copy of their announcement on 22 September.
Andrew Boff AM: How soon can Londoners expect a u-turn on this decision?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I think the global CEO has already done a u-turn. I think Londoners should welcome the u-turn from the global CEO of Uber. Londoners will be aware - the Assembly certainly will - of the approach of London Uber, and UK Uber in the past and of the Global CEO of the past. I think we should welcome this u-turn from the global CEO. That is one of the reasons why I asked the TfL Commissioner to make himself available for discussions.
Andrew Boff AM: What was that u-turn, Mr Mayor?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That was the apology given by the global CEO of Uber to Londoners. Again, I can arrange for his apology to be sent to you if you have not seen it, but that was a u-turn.
Andrew Boff AM: Yes. I do not think anybody has seen it. There was an apology, a global apology, and you are saying there was a subsequent apology?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, I can only apologise if the Assembly Member is not aware of the apology given by the global CEO to Londoners. It was in the well-read newspaper, The Evening Standard, which had a page setting out the apology to Londoners. But I can arrange for that copy of The Standard to be sent to Assembly Member Boff.
Andrew Boff AM: I am grateful.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I appreciate the Conservative Party does not like The Standard now, but we will send that to you.
Andrew Boff AM: I am very grateful for the sarcasm. You are saying that apology was the basis of your u-turn?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): No, I said that was the u-turn from Uber. I think you are either intentionally or unintentionally misquoting me. There was no u-turn from TfL, no u-turn from me. There was a u-turn from Uber and I welcome this u-turn. You clearly have not seen it, which is why you mentioned you not knowing about it.
Andrew Boff AM: No, I have seen that apology, Mr Mayor. I thought it must be a different one.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I will send you the apology from the global CEO to Londoners and then you can see the u-turn from them.
Andrew Boff AM: I thought we might be referring to a different one, because what particularly did the CEO of Uber apologise for?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I will arrange for that to be sent to you, because you clearly have not seen that, and you can --
Andrew Boff AM: You obviously have read it; you told me you have. What was it? What was the apology?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It was apologising to Londoners --
Andrew Boff AM: For?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): -- for mistakes made by Uber in the past.
Andrew Boff AM: Which mistakes were they?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I do not want to put words in the Uber CEO’s mouth, but I will send you the words.
Andrew Boff AM: Those words were not in the news report.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am afraid they were and I am sorry you were not around to see them.
Andrew Boff AM: The specific reasons for the apology were not in the news report and they were bundled together with certain apologies about the management of staff and certain approaches on a different basis. There were no specific apologies on any specific item raised by TfL when it rejected the application, just before you were accepted to speak at the Labour Party conference.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am very happy to send you the apology from the global CEO which will hopefully correct the misunderstanding you are under.
Andrew Boff AM: Did you enjoy your speech at the Labour Party conference, Mayor?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I did, thank you.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Excuse, Mr Boff, where does the Labour Party conference and Uber meet?
Andrew Boff AM: One second and you will find out. Was threatening the incomes and livelihoods of 40,000 people worth getting your speech at the Labour Party conference for?
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Let us have another question. I want the Member to put a question regarding the question that he has on the order paper. Thank you.
Andrew Boff AM: Was the threatening of the livelihoods of the 40,000 Uber drivers worthwhile in terms of getting your speech at the Labour Party conference? Was it OK?
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): No, it was not. That is not an appropriate question. I will not have an answer from you on that, Mayor. Do you wish to have another question or shall I move on, Assembly Member Boff?
Andrew Boff AM: If I am not going to be allowed by the Chair to ask my questions, I think I had better stop.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Thank you. Let us then call Assembly Member Devenish on the matter on the order paper.
Tony Devenish AM: Thank you, Chair. Mr Mayor, good morning. Do you accept that when politicians of any party make a decision that actually hurts real people, that is when the public really take a dim view of all of us?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That is the reason why Jeremy Corbyn [The Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP, Leader of the Labour Party] raised Universal Credit yesterday at Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs). It is an outrage. It is an outrage how people are suffering because of decisions made by politicians and so of course I think politicians should stand by their decisions.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Mr Mayor, my comments to the Assembly, can I also put them to you. We want to hear what you have to say, what you have done and --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, with respect --
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): No, I wanted to say that so that we can move on for the day --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure. No, Chair, the question was --
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): -- otherwise we will just end up in a really bad place.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure, Chair.
Andrew Boff AM: You did not intervene with the Mayor for his answer on Universal Credit.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): I am going to say to him, “Can I have an answer to the question regarding your perspective, your views? If you have none, we can move on to another question”. You have none?
Tony Devenish AM: You have nothing to say about 40,000 people having their careers damaged?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just say this --
Tony Devenish AM: The lowest-paid Londoners, who cannot actually possibly pay for food for their kids’ tables?
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): He does not have a question yet. What is the question?
Tony Devenish AM: The question is when we make decisions, do we look at the effects to real people?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just say, Chairman, I welcome the Conservative Party finally taking an interest in the low pay and conditions of the lowest paid workers in London.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Thank you. Do you have another question, Assembly Member Devenish?
Tony Devenish AM: Really this is a farce, frankly.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Assembly Member Duvall.
Len Duvall AM: Mr Mayor, do you not recall Assembly Member Keith Prince, I think, in the summer asking you not to license Uber and making representations to you on the very point that TfL have intervened and brought Uber to account?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just say this, Assembly Member Duvall: one of the reasons why the public are sick to death of cynical politicians is the behaviour of these guys this morning. At the previous Mayor’s Question Time, that side accused me of being too cosy with Uber, because the Chair of the Night Time Commission, who is a Queen’s Counsel (QC), did a case for a driver. The Assembly has passed a unanimous motion welcoming TfL’s decision, but because these guys think it is a cheap hit to criticise me for alleged bias, being too cosy to the black cab drivers, they are now criticising me for supporting TfL. During my administration, I want TfL to be empowered to operate in a quasi-judicial manner when it is appropriate to do so. I support TfL’s decision and I welcome the approach taken by the global CEO of Uber. To suggest, from the Assembly Member, that somehow TfL has done a u-turn when you have seen a change of stance, which I welcome, from the global CEO of Uber just beggars belief.
Gareth Bacon AM: Just for factual reasons, Mr Mayor, because you have pointed collectively at us twice now, how many Conservative Members voted in this unanimous motion that you
were talking about? How many were in the room and how many people put questions to you about Uber? The reason for the question, it is very simple, Chair, because clearly the party opposite do not get it, is that the Mayor is attempting to smear all of the Conservative Members and tar us all with the same brush, so the question stands. How many Members in each case are you talking about?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just say, Chair, what I saw was the Assembly’s statement, which was from the London Assembly, with a quote from the Chair of the Assembly. Not unreasonably, this refers to motions and whether they were passed unanimously or by a majority. Now, it is not for me if some Conservative Members do not turn up or have a toilet break. What I do know --
Gareth Bacon AM: Chair, the Mayor does not even answer --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): If I could answer the question, Chair. What I do know --
Gareth Bacon AM: He is not answering the question. He does it all the time.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): -- is the record will show the motion was passed unanimously.
Gareth Bacon AM: Yes, and the answer - for the avoidance of doubt, Chair, because the Mayor clearly does not know the answer - is one. In each case, the answer is one. There are eight Conservative Members, Mr Mayor, so trying to say --
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Assembly Member Bacon, have you got another question?
Gareth Bacon AM: -- attempting to say that all Assembly Members have done one thing on one hand and one thing on another is inaccurate.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, I think there is a separate issue about value for money for the taxpayer if only one turns up.
Gareth Bacon AM: Your record for turning up, Mr Mayor, is not brilliant, so I really would not start throwing stones in that way.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): One out of eight turned up? Really? Crikey.
2017/3938 - New housing policies Sian Berry AM
How will the new measures announced in your draft Housing Strategy preserve and increase genuinely affordable homes in London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Chair. Thank you for your question. For many years, we have failed to deliver anywhere near enough new homes in London. We have particularly been failing to build enough new affordable homes. There is a gulf between what London is building and what Londoners need. 80% of the new homes built in London are now affordable to just 8% of Londoners. My long-term aim is that half of new homes built should be affordable. We know that moving forward towards this target will take time, considering that when I took office, just 13% of the pipeline of new homes were affordable. When I say affordable, unlike my predecessor, I do not believe that 80% of market rates is genuinely affordable for most Londoners.
To raise the level of affordable housing, the strategy outlines measures in three key areas. First it sets out that I will use the London Plan to strengthen the planning guidance I have already published to ensure developers contribute their fair share of affordable homes. The guidance supports schemes where at least 35% of homes are affordable before any public subsidy is taken into account by fast-tracking them through the planning system. Those that fail to meet the requirement will have their viability assessments made public and interrogated by my team of viability experts.
Second, the draft Housing Strategy sets out how I want to increase the level of investment in affordable homes. With more funding, we could do more to help Londoners with the lowest income. Third, my draft strategy prioritises the delivery of affordable homes and publicly- owned land, including land owned by mayoral organisations. The strategy includes a target for 50% of homes developed on Greater London Authority (GLA) land being affordable.
My strategy also has many other policies, including a series of measures to protect Londoners’ existing affordable homes and calling on the Government to reform the way that right to buy operates to ensure homes that are sold are replaced on a like for like basis. The strategy also explains that where estate regeneration schemes entail the demolition of affordable homes, I will use my planning and investment powers to ensure these are replaced on a like for like basis. This has not been a plan requirement of either previous mayors and not a requirement of Government either, so it provides a genuinely new protection for affordable housing, particularly social rented housing. I am also working on the first-ever London Good Practice Guide to Estate Regeneration.
Sian Berry AM: OK, thank you, Mr Mayor. In my supplementary questions, I want to talk about the definition of “affordable” in terms of intermediate rent in the draft Housing Strategy. Just to be very clear, I am not here to have a go at you about this. These are going to be very constructive questions, Mr Mayor. I think the problem is that London has a problem. I know - you just said so again - you hate the ‘80% of the market rates’ definition as much as I do and I suspect I would be having similar problems as you, if I was Mayor, dealing with this. I think the problem is pretty clear. You have put into your strategy in section 4.1(b) a bullet point that covers London Living Rent homes, and that is a very good definition of affordable in terms of wages, but there is also a bullet there that says, “A range of other types of intermediate rented homes” and a reference to a £60,000 income. Then in the glossary we have got the definition of affordable rent, which is the definition from the Government, from the NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework), which says, “Not more than 80% of the local market rent”.
Your Housing Strategy is not a new planning policy yet, but my worry is if that definition makes it through into the London Plan, it will have a loophole, developers will use it and outside your funding streams; that is what we will mainly see in private developments. I want to be constructive and see what we can do about this. Is this 80% of market definition of affordable rent in the Housing Strategy at the Government’s insistence or just based on what is on the NPPF? Have you discussed it with them and tried to change it?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Firstly, the draft Housing Strategy is a draft Housing Strategy, so please do respond to consultation.
Sian Berry AM: I will.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I will be encouraging everyone to respond to the consultation. It is a meaningful consultation. Secondly, I think the Government deserves credit for not being insistent on all the affordable homes being 80% of market value or starter homes. If you remember the conversation we were having during the mayoral election, it was the Government saying a starter home of £450,000 was affordable and 80% of market value. To give the previous Housing Minister, Gavin Barwell, credit, he was flexible in the definition. The three definitions we got through in relation to the deal we made was one where it is a London Living Rent, a third of average earnings, and that, by definition, will change in different parts of London. Secondly, shared ownership, and I know there are concerns around how much the income should be for shared ownership, and third, a social rent, which is a formula based on manual working. The flexibility is there, but the spectrum we are giving is what is affordable across London.
Sian Berry AM: Yes. If I can clarify though, what you are talking about there is the funding deal that you did with Government. The Conservative Party Conference announcement about new housing funds, which I think you also talked to the Government about this week, they do seem to be suggesting that even they are losing faith in market rates as a measure of affordability. Their policy was specifically to put more social homes into areas with very high market rates. Do you think in terms of changing the planning policies that maybe gives us an opening? What I am really asking is what we can do as an Assembly, what Londoners can do to try to help you campaign to get this definition changed. I think the implications are really serious if you have got £60,000 a year and you still cannot afford a family home even with that kind of salary.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): To rent or buy?
Sian Berry AM: To rent.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): To rent. In the rental market, we are doing a number of things to try to stabilise the increases in the rental market in London.
Sian Berry AM: I am talking about planning policies though only. Is this something --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): But planning can reduce the rents. The idea is if we reduce the value of land by the viability team, if we use the revolving fund to help assemble land, that will hopefully bring down the land. The other thing some innovative councils, like Islington, are doing is using planning briefs to try to deflate the land going through the roof.
Sian Berry AM: I am running out of time, I am really sorry. This has actually started to be quite a good discussion. I am waiting for a date for a meeting with you since the June Mayor’s Question Time, when we talked about estates. I wonder if I can get that date soon and we can discuss this more?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure, We will sort that. I will chase that up, Chair.
Sian Berry AM: Thanks.
2017/4102 - London’s Population Growth David Kurten AM
Does the Mayor consider that a projected increase in London’s population to 12 million by 2050 is unsustainable?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am not sure where the 12 million figure came from. I consider that an increase in London’s population to around 11.2 million in 33 years’ time by 2050, the central prediction of the GLA intelligence team, is sustainable if properly planned for. Across the world, the population of cities are rising. Currently, 54% of the world’s population lives in cities. By 2050, that will be 66% of the world’s population. Growth per se is not a bad thing. The most important thing is that we properly plan for such growth. This is what I am doing through my draft strategies, including the London Plan. The London Plan will ensure that we make best use of land through intensification, encouraging a mix of land uses and through collocating different uses. My plan sets out how we can do this, while also ensuring the protection of our prized green belt and other green and open spaces. Transport has got a vital role to play in delivering good growth and that is why I have been ambitious by ensuring that by 2041, four in five journeys in London are connected on foot, by cycle and using public transport.
We also need to fix our broken housing market, as I have just said, and my draft London Housing Strategy sets out plans how we can do this. I have also got plans in my draft Environment Strategy about sustainable buildings and ensuring that future buildings are zero- carbon homes, as well as ensuring that we can have all non-residential development to be zero- carbon from 2019.
Finally, Chair, my draft Economic Development Strategy sets out our ambitions for maximising opportunity for all, including access to education and skills, fairer pay and work practices.
David Kurten AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. There does seem to be a slight discrepancy between the data that you have given from the London Databank and the Office for National
Statistics that puts the figure about 500,000 higher, but there is still going to be a large population increase. One of the things I have asked you about before is water. In an answer to a question, you did say that Thames Water, which provides water to 70% of London’s population, does forecast a deficit of 100 million litres per day by 2020, rising to a deficit of 400 million litres per day by 2040. Now, in various committees we have talked about possible plans to build a reservoir in Oxfordshire. I do not know if that is something that is just an aspiration or something that is actually going to take place. Have you got any more information about how we are going to prevent London from having a water deficit in the future?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just say, the issue you raise about water shortages is one that is at the fore of the minds of many mayors around the world, us included. Thames do have plans to build a reservoir in Oxford. They are plans, not an aspiration. They are also taking steps to address the issue of leakages. You will be aware of the issue we have of leakages across London. The reality is many of the pipes are Victorian pipes and have not been maintained properly. In addition to improving the maintenance of the pipes, they have got plans for the reservoir that you talked about. I am happy to send you the details of the plans and Thames Water are in advanced stages in relation to that.
David Kurten AM: OK, thank you. Now, something else I have asked you about, which I know that you have concerns about as well, is the type of energy which comes to London through the National Grid. I have mentioned it, the National Grid is closing coal power stations and replacing them with burning wood. That means that we are chopping down forests in North and South America, turning them into wood pellets, shipping them across the Atlantic and burning them in power stations like Drax and others to provide electricity through the National Grid, which we will need more of, because you want to turn the city into eventually electric-only cars and you have got plans for 300 charging points. I know you said in an answer,
“The increased demand for biomass, that it is used in this highly energy inefficient way, concerns me. It can only add to the pressure on the existing resource and supply chains and has potential to encourage unscrupulous biomass trading, resulting in further deforestation.”
This is where London is going to get some of our energy from. What have you done through C40 cities network and other contacts you have to counter this use of biomass in our biggest power stations and to prevent deforestation in North and South America?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, I do not accept a number of the premises made in the question, so I do not want my answer to assume that I accept some of the premises made, but it is the reason we published the draft Environmental Strategy, which brought together six different strategies into one. Separately in relation to C40 you asked the question, and I am one of the vice-chairs of C40, and they are looking at a whole host of issues, including sustainable energy and how we can learn from each other. I am not sure if it is fair to say though that we are increasing a reliance on wood-burning power stations. In fact, it is the other way.
David Kurten AM: Well, Drax.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): In fact, we as a country are going far more towards renewable and I welcome this. My criticism is we are not going fast enough. It is not accurate to say that we are going backwards. Actually, living in cities, your question was about cities and population, is more environmentally friendly. Denser populations living in cities is better for the environment than being spread out in rural parts of the country.
David Kurten AM: It is sustainability, because with an increase in population, we will need more energy, but I will move on to ask you another thing. One of the things that you will need to do is increase the capacity of the rail network and the Underground network etc, but there have recently been problems with the Northern and Jubilee line, the trains which were going to be ordered are not going to come on time. We hear from TfL that Crossrail 2 might be delayed by ten years. Is that going to have an effect on the ability of Londoners to move around if there is such a huge population growth and what are you going to do about those two issues?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Our current population is 8.8 million. You talked about different figures in 2050. We can go sooner than that: 8.8 million now, 9 million in 2020, 10 million in 2030. That is one of the reasons why the draft strategy set out a plan to get more people walking, more people cycling, more people using public transport. One of the things we are doing is increasing public transport capacity. That is why, for example, the Elizabeth line opening next year and the year after, part of it opens December 2018 and part of it 2019, will increase public transport capacity by more than 10%. It goes to the east and to the west, 40 new stations from east to west. It will increase transport capacity. Will Norman, the Walking and Cycling Commissioner, is encouraging more people to walk and cycle.
The reason in relation to the Jubilee and Northern line times for the trains was because the trains we have increased efficiency; we have improved signalling. We have got the Northern line extension to Battersea, we have got the Elizabeth line starting 2018, so that means the need for the Jubilee line additional trains is less, because people will divert from the Jubilee line to the Elizabeth line. We should welcome the engineering advances made, the advances made elsewhere, which means rather than having to buy a train on a certain day, we can delay the need to buy the train until a future date, which saves us money. We would not buy a new car when your current car is working really well. Why should we spend money on a new train when the current trains, because of increased engineering, are working well?
David Kurten AM: All right. Thank you, Mr Mayor.
2017/3996 - Modern Day Slavery Jennette Arnold
What measures are the Metropolitan Police taking towards ending Modern Day Slavery in London and how many prosecutions have been undertaken by the Met and CPS?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for this timely question, Chair Arnold. You will no doubt have seen the recent Evening Standard campaign on modern slavery. Modern slavery
and the trafficking of people are truly appalling crimes. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has a central role in tackling modern slavery. In part, this is through its work nationally and internationally to tackle the organised criminal networks at the heart of trafficking and slavery, but equally, the MPS has a key role in providing support for victims. They are one of the only dedicated modern slavery and kidnap units in the country which deals with all referrals of modern slavery through the national referral mechanism. This unit works closely with the voluntary and community sector to identify the appropriate support of victims.
As of August 2017, there have been 59 arrests made under modern slavery charges and there were 88 arrests in total in 2016. Unfortunately, ascertaining prosecution numbers for modern slavery cases is complex. Offences can fall under a number of Acts even beyond the Modern Slavery Act, so it would be misleading to give a figure. What I can say is that since the Act came into force, we are aware of at least six cases in London resulted in convictions which have used the new legislation. Although it is still embedding, the Act does provide useful additional tools for enforcement. The MPS are actively working to increase convictions.
However, we need to be upfront that is not something to be dealt with by the MPS alone. In my Police and Crime Plan, I have made a commitment to bring partners together to look at how we work collectively, share in intelligence and best practice and pooling resources to target our response. Via the London Modern Slavery Partnership Board, we are already building awareness of frontline professionals to identify victims and working with industries to make supply chains more transparent and looking at how we target enforcement to pursue abuse that takes place on a smaller scale.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Thank you for that. I have got a couple of questions. Because of the need to raise awareness and share as much information as possible, will you look to ensuring that the work of the board and the work of all the meetings that you are having, the Deputies are having around this issue, is publicised as soon as possible? I am sure we can find a mechanism of doing that.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes, for the record.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Yes, that is great. Now, I welcome the commitment in the draft Police and Crime Plan to establish the dedicated slavery single point of contact officer in each borough. Being realistic on where borough funds are, would you agree with me if that post is not funded by the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), then what we would then have is really one or two boroughs maybe having this person and that that would be totally unacceptable, given the seriousness of the situation?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I agree with you. Just to reassure you, Chair, we are currently identifying a modern slavery ambassador for every borough. These officers will get additional awareness training so they can respond to questions and concerns by colleagues at a borough level. But you are right, there is no point those boroughs that can afford it having it and those that cannot not having it, so you are right to raise the issue of resources and the link with the quality of service we provide.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): The other point, having spoken to the women who have escaped and who have had to, if you like, launch their own campaign - and they have received support, and I acknowledge the support from the editor of The Evening Standard, yourself and others - will you keep up the pressure on MOPAC and all bodies that you meet, including the Home Office, to just say to them that women enslaved is as important as the time and energy we spend regarding smuggling guns and drugs? Smuggling and trafficking of humans has got to be the top priority, would you agree with me, and will you continue to take that work forward?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I could not agree more. Just to reassure you, Chair, one of the reasons why the Modern Slavery Partnership Board was set up was because of the lack of co-ordination taking place. You will be aware that in addition to the “police partners” on there, there are also very important partners from the community as well. It is crucial we provide more information, but also, that we do not allow this to fall down the list of priorities.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): The women involved are relaunching their organisation. I will make sure you get an invite.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That is very kind, thank you.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Thank you.
Andrew Boff AM: Mr Mayor, this is the first I have heard of the ambassadors for human trafficking. Could you just tell me where they are going to be coming from? Who is going to be appointed? Is it going to be a police officer; is it going to be somebody from the local authority?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure, thank you. Yes, it will be a police officer. It is really important to cascade the training down to other colleagues in a borough level, because if you approach a neighbourhood police officer, he or she may not have the expertise, but if there is an ambassador within the borough, they can make sure there is that skillset passed down.
Andrew Boff AM: OK, thank you very much.
2017/3917 - Borough mergers and response times Steve O’Connell AM
How will you ensure that response times in the new merged borough commands remain at satisfactory levels?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I thank you for this question. I know this is something that the Police and Crime Committee have been looking into and I understand the concerns, the genuine concerns, that you and the committee have. I have been clear with the Commissioner that response times fell to an unacceptable level in the two Basic Command Unit pathfinders and urgently needed to improve. The MPS has responded by making additional short-term
resource available to response teams and adapting the Basic Command Unit (BCU) response model in each pathfinder. These changes have had an impact and performance has improved over the last couple of months. The MPS has given assurance that it has learned important lessons in how it manages response within the BCU model and response times are now moving back towards comparable levels with other areas of London.
My Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime is continuing to monitor all areas of performance across the pathfinders. It is important to be clear about the context that surrounds the MPS pathfinders. The Government has reduced police funding, putting policing under real pressure at a time when the MPS is facing an unprecedented challenge of dealing with increased demand in terms of volume, complexity and harm. The MPS has already made over £600 million in savings and is now faced with making a further £400 million by 2021. The lack of funding will inevitably lead to police officer numbers continuing to fall. The MPS must therefore continue to plan for the future and transform itself to meet the needs of Londoners.
I welcome the recent Budget and Performance Committee report, [Who’s paying the Bill?], which recognises the police funding crisis in London. It is also important to recognise there is far more to the borough mergers than response. It is the BCUs that will enable improvements to investigation, ensuring experienced detectives are dealing with the complex crimes and it is the BCUs that will improve safeguarding, protecting the most vulnerable by bringing together local services relating to domestic abuse, mental health and missing persons with currently centralised sexual offence investigation and child protection to provide a joined-up and local specialist service. I want to see the evaluation, which will provide a full picture of what has been learnt and how the proposed model has evolved and will continue to do so.
Steve O’Connell AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. Picking up on the poor performance of all the five boroughs regarding response, I would like to return to that, because you will be aware that across London, and cross-party indeed, there is widespread concern around the mergers. One of the main concerns is around response times, particularly in those larger boroughs in outer London. Mr Mayor, do you accept, on the back of what you have just confirmed, that there is widespread concern around the mergers in London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sorry, in the five boroughs or elsewhere?
Steve O’Connell AM: Across London generally about the proposed mergers.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Listen, of course. Of course, political colleagues, Members of Parliament, councillors, and Assembly Members, are concerned about 32 going to 12. In those BCUs that are a bigger geographical area, there are understandable concerns about response times for the reasons you have alluded to in the three-borough BCUs. But I hope I have been transparent about what are the reasons that are driving some of these mergers. I think there is an upside. The response times hopefully we can address, but on investigation, safeguarding and neighbourhoods, there will be improvements, I hope.
Steve O’Connell AM: What do you suggest? For example, the proposed boroughs were actually named with the Borough Commanders eight or nine months ago. Do you sense that it has kind of been mishandled?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am not sure about that. There were a number of things that the general election has caused delays for and issues with, not just in policing. I think the police would be criticised if they did not plan. Some of these things you have got to plan for months in advance, so they are damned if they do and they are damned if they do not. They do not want to cause unnecessary concern, but I am in favour of planning ahead. So, had the general election not happened and we had not lost that time, we would have been hopefully at a more advanced stage.
Steve O’Connell AM: I think the danger is you using the word “they” so much, because you must take obvious responsibility because it is your Police and Crime Plan.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely.
Steve O’Connell AM: You and your Deputy Mayor would have agreed to that. As I have said earlier, there are many boroughs who have already written to you, mine and others, about the preferences that are designated in your plan. Many of those boroughs disagree quite strongly with the boroughs they have been twinned with. I will not go into it, because there are a lot of details around it. At what stage, Mr Mayor, will you basically direct the police to implement the borough mergers, in essence riding roughshod over the boroughs’ objections?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I say, Chair, I am really happy to be candid about this. I accept responsibility in relation to having to make the savings the Government is requiring me to make. Let us not, as you are tending to do, forget history. History is we have had to make £600 million worth of cuts from 2012 until 2016. I have got to find another £400 million. I am responsible for making those cuts imposed upon me by Government. One of the ways we can make some savings is BCUs; another way is closing station front offices; another way is closing police stations. By the way, we are probably going to have cut police officers as well. Look, the buck stops with me, but I need to find 25% of the policing budget. I have increased the policing precept. Actually, when I speak to politicians from all parties, privately - and some publicly - they accept the Government has got to step up and fund us better. If they funded us better, we would not have to do some of these things.
Steve O’Connell AM: It is all about choices, Mr Mayor, and around this chamber we agree that --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely. That is what I keep saying to the Government, it is about choices. Do not make cuts.
Steve O’Connell AM: Yes. We agree that London deserves a good police settlement; that is the fact of it. Going on to closures of police stations, I believe you will be announcing the final decisions in a few weeks’ time. How do you feel that that will be received by Londoners, particularly around confidence and engagement?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Again, this is an example of us having to do this because of cuts imposed upon us by Government. Nobody wants their police station to close down or the front office counter to close down. The only good news is the actual usage of these police stations and front office counters over the years, because of phones and internet and other social media, has decreased and people have other ways of contacting the police. We have restored dedicated ward officers in some wards, which means you can speak to a police officer face-to-face. That has improved things, but I cannot imagine many people campaigning to close their police station down. We know from history, when Boris Johnson [The Rt Hon Boris Johnson MP, former Mayor of London] closed 63 down, nobody was campaigning to keep them open. He had to do that because of cuts imposed by a Conservative and Liberal Democrat Government.
Steve O’Connell AM: OK. Lastly, you talked about it being driven by budget savings and one could not disagree completely with that, but if you speak to senior police, as I do, for some considerable time they have been wanting to move towards this model, predicated not just necessarily on finances. That is a statement more than a question. It has been some time now. Your Police and Crime Plan is getting on to a year old. In three or four months, you will be two years in. You have talked about savings out of this project. When do you think, in your mind’s eye, that the borough mergers will be operational? When will the button be pressed, do you think?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): At the last Mayor’s Question Time I gave an assurance to Assembly Member Dismore and to Assembly Member Bacon that I would be writing to them about the evaluation process. I will write to them shortly. We are just finalising that now. I would expect a decision to be made before the end of this year, but for the reasons you alluded to in relation to preparation, some preparation is taking place in relation to other parts of London for obvious reasons. I would be surprised if that evaluation is not made available soon with the decisions made once they have been evaluated towards the end of this year or early next year.
Steve O’Connell AM: Just to reflect on that, what we are probably looking at is some decision-making, in essence, two years into your mayoralty, it is fair to say, around springtime, and then there will have to be sequential introductions to them. It would suggest to me - and you may agree or disagree - that probably it will have taken two and a half years to get those models in place, which is quite a long time when you are looking at proposed savings, Mr Mayor.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I think there is a question there, Chair --
Steve O’Connell AM: There is.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): -- and the answer to that is on the one hand I am being criticised for rushing ahead and on the other hand I am being criticised for not bringing in the savings sooner. Which one is it?
Steve O’Connell AM: I am just having the discussion, Mr Mayor. Thank you very much.
Tony Devenish AM: Mr Mayor, during this process consultation it has not been seen to be open and transparent. Will you have a review at the end of this process of how you have communicated with residents? Many of my residents are only just hearing about these closures. They have busy lives in London and they are concerned the process has not been fair and transparent and has already been pre-judged. Rightly or wrongly, that is their perception. Will you review this at the end and come up with lessons learnt, please?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sorry, Chair, is this about borough mergers?
Tony Devenish AM: Yes.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): OK. I think you are conflating police station closures with borough mergers. Which one is it?
Tony Devenish AM: No, it is borough mergers. You are absolutely right, people are hearing the same stories when they are talking about police station closures and they do tend to mix the two things up, but it is the lack of consultation and open transparency in communication.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure. I am happy to share, Chair, with the Assembly Member the numbers who have responded, and they are big numbers. That shows the consultation has been really important. That has been not just via public meetings, not just through email and not just through surveys but other ways as well, including by elected politicians. I am happy always to learn lessons. You can always improve. If there are lessons to learn, it is important we do learn and I am always happy to take advice from colleagues around the table, who know their communities better than I do. Please feel free to let me know how we can improve. The last I want to do is to have a process that Londoners feel does not involve them, so I am happy to take ideas, Chair.
Keith Prince AM: Mr Mayor, would you be kind enough to comment on your Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime’s approach to discussions with the borough leaders in relation to the borough mergers in my patch and the others, in which she felt it was appropriate to exclude both Assembly Members from that meeting with borough leaders?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, I simply do not know about that. Let me look into that and get back. I just do not know about that.
Keith Prince AM: Do you think, Mr Mayor, it would be more appropriate, if she is having a meeting with the borough leaders to discuss the tri-borough pathfinder in Havering, Redbridge and Barking and Dagenham that she should at least do us the courtesy of inviting us to that meeting?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, sorry, I am not sure if they have been excluded or not invited. Which one is it?
Keith Prince AM: Being excluded, Mr Mayor. I have publicly asked her if she would invite myself and Assembly Member Desai and she said no. I think it is most inappropriate, for a meeting that concerns two of my boroughs and one of Unmesh’s [Unmesh Desai AM] boroughs, that she would exclude us, Mr Mayor.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I just do not know the facts, Chair. I am happy to look into them and get back to the Assembly Member.
Keith Prince AM: Do you think that is the right thing to do?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Experience has told me not to assume the premise of a proposition made by a Tory. I will look into it and get back to you.
Keith Prince AM: I have to correct you. I am not a Tory.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): You are not a Tory?
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): I think we heard the first answer, that you will look into it and get back to Assembly Member Prince and that the Assembly will be copied into that because other Members might have similar concerns.
2017/4065 - London Sustainability and Transformation Plans Joanne McCartney AM
The King’s Fund and Nuffield Trust’s recent independent report found that London’s Sustainability and Transformation Plans to reduce hospital use and cut the number of beds on the scale proposed were “not credible”. Do you share this assessment? What more needs to be done to ensure our NHS can continue to deliver high quality health services?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for your question. The King’s Fund and Nuffield Trust are both highly respected in health and care policy. This independent report, which I commissioned, provides a thorough analysis of the sustainability and transformation plans, STPs, in London. It is a considered piece of work and I am taking its findings seriously.
We have a situation in London where there are plans to reduce beds and staffing, which in turn would have a knock-on effect on social care. The report is clear. London’s National Health Service (NHS) will have a funding gap of over £4 billion by 2020. We know that London’s population is growing, the demand for healthcare is increasing and our needs get more complex as the population grows. Rather than fewer beds, as proposed in these plans, the King’s Fund highlights the need for nearly 1,600 additional beds by 2021, as well as more staff.
In response to the report’s findings I have set out six assurances that need to be addressed before I can support any future plans for health and care services. London must have sufficient hospital capacity. Plans to reduce beds must be carefully considered and any proposals that reduce the number of beds must be independently reviewed. London needs the right
investment. Proper funding must be identified and available to credibly deliver these STPs. All proposed changes must have engaged patients and the public and have clinical support. The plans must not widen health inequalities and show how they will show the gap in health inequality across London. The plans must also take into account any impact on social care, especially when boroughs are under such financial pressure. I will continue to press London’s NHS across these six assurances. London’s health service must not be allowed to deteriorate at a time of increased demand.
Joanne McCartney AM: Thank you. The report made sobering reading. As my question stated, with regards to the issue of hospital beds the King’s Fund report said that the plans were not credible. Locally in my area of north central London, the plans have been met with that same level of scepticism by local people. We are looking in my area at consolidation of acute services and consolidation of specialist services on to fewer sites, such as maternity - an alternative would be to say “closure” - and rationing of some forms of elective surgery. I noticed the report suggested that yourself and the London Health Board could take a more city- wide role in providing some strategic oversight into the STPs. Would you be willing to do that or not?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It is important to understand that devolution must mean power and resources. Without resources, the power is meaningless. I am happy to take on a leadership role. The London Health Board is really important. I chair the London Health Board. I meet regularly with the NHS London representative. We have a new one, Professor Jane Cummings, who is doing a good job. She is from NHS England. There is a role for the Mayor to play. I am looking forward to finally signing the memorandum of understanding around health, which is the first step towards devolution. When it comes to these decisions being made, what has been raised previously by the Assembly are local politicians, local residents and local experts being excluded from the process before the decisions are being taken. If I can bring something to the table in relation to consultation, that is really important. The key thing that the King’s Fund found, which beggars belief, is that the plans want to reduce beds at a time when actually we need more beds. It just does not make sense to me.
Joanne McCartney AM: You obviously have discussions with the health service from time to time and I know that NHS across London are looking at this report. Do you think it will have an impact? Will you be able to use this report, do you think, to make the case to both NHS and Government about the need for extra resources in our city?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): One of the reasons why we asked King’s Fund and Nuffield to do the work is that they are independent, they are respected and they have no particular agenda. The good news is that the five STPs appear to have taken on board some of the points raised in the report. We have evidence already of two of them changing their minds about things and hopefully they will make that public shortly.
At the crux of this is the need for resources, initial resources, from central Government. At the crux of it is that the NHS in London has been starved of the resources she needs to make sure she is fit for purpose. I would say that my role is to both challenge and champion the NHS. I think you are seeing some movement among the STPs. The NHS recognises the STPs in London
are not working as they should and I am hoping for some progress, particularly once we have signed the devolution package with the Government.
Joanne McCartney AM: Thank you.
2017/3995 - Disproportionality in BAME individuals in the CJS Jennette Arnold AM
In David Lammy’s recent review into the treatment of, and outcomes for BAME individuals in the Criminal Justice System, he made a recommendation for you to review the Trident Matrix to examine the way information is gathered, verified, stored and shared with specific reference to BAME disproportionality. Has the Mayor considered this recommendation in his review of the Trident Matrix and how will he use the findings in the report to address BAME disproportionality in the Criminal Justice System in London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Discrimination and bias in our criminal justice system or any of our institutions is completely unacceptable and I welcome David Lammy’s review, which shines a detailed light on this important issue. Every Londoner has the right to be treated fairly and with respect, regardless of their ethnicity. As the Government’s recent published Race Disparity Audit shows, people’s experiences across education, employment, health and housing, to name only a few, can vary with their ethnicity. I recognise the issues raised in David’s review. That is why reducing disproportionality and inequality are key themes in my Police and Crime Plan and why I set out a commitment in my manifesto to review the matrix. In support of his review, my Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime met with David Lammy a number of times, as did colleagues from the MPS Trident [Gang Crime] Command.
The matrix is used to identify the most harmful gang members in a borough, with scores based on an individual’s involvement in violence only. It has a number of uses both in terms of enforcement and helping to identify individuals for support and intervention, but we need to ensure it is a fair and proportionate tool used in conjunction with other indicators. Through our review, it is crucial that we help communities to better understand how the MPS targets both street-level gangs and also those who organise and supply gangs. My Police and Crime Plan is committed to ensuring there is better criminal justice for London and a key priority within this is to agree a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry of Justice on devolution of elements of the criminal justice system to London and a more joined-up approach to supporting victims and reducing reoffending. This is critical to ensuring greater transparency and trust in the criminal justice system in London.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Thank you, Mr Mayor. Can I just focus now on the Trident matrix? I share a concern about the matrix in its current form. I am not arguing against its existence, I am just saying that it is possible that something has gone wrong. Just the figures alone lead to some questions. The figures that I have picked out of David Lammy’s report and of work that has been done by Liberty is showing that about 87% of the young people listed in the matrix are from black and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds. This is about three times
their percentage in the population or more. That sort of disproportionate level is worrying, is it not?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It is. Just to underscore your point, the latest figures I have are that they are 99% male, 88% BAME and 79% under 25. You are right, these figures look disproportionate in relation to the general population and that is why there is a review taking place.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Let me just be clear what you have said, that the Trident matrix is under review specifically.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Correct.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): I was not clear about the timescale and how that would be reported.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am happy for Sophie Linden [Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime] to give you a briefing this issue. It is being reviewed as we speak. David Lammy is being consulted in relation to the matrix and how it works. By the way, the MPS also appreciate that there should be a review of this. I do not want the impression to be given that this is the MOPAC imposing a review on the MPS. It really is a collegiate approach from the MPS. The objective, as you know, is to reduce gang-related violence. The objection is a noble one. The point David made is that you do not want to inadvertently, with the best of intentions, cause problems, and that is why we are reviewing it.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Yes. As it stands, it does feed this negative narrative about young black Londoners, if you like, focusing on London, when in fact it is young black Londoners who are disproportionately affected by the sort of criminality that Trident was set up to deal with. The thing seems to have grown like topsy and some urgent work is needed.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely. The Commissioner made this point. When the Commissioner met victims of knife crime and gang-related crime, the point she made was that those who are the victims are black Londoners and what nobody wants is a disproportionate use of this from the criminal justice service on black Londoners, presuming them to be offenders. What you do not want is to inadvertently lead to a situation where the public does not have confidence in the police. Policing by consent only works if the public has confidence in the police to report things, to give them intelligence and to help them fight crime. One of the reasons again for reviewing this is because the police want to be more effective. Trident and others are happy to go along with the review.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Right. I know from the report that there are supposedly 18 “gang boroughs”. The term is worrying to me, but in documentation that is what is used. If I can extend your offer that your Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime will meet up with me to other Assembly members - I know my colleague, Assembly Member Desai, and I, sharing borders, have similar concerns and other Members might have similar concerns - I will arrange a meeting with her for an update.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely. David Lammy’s report is very good. It covers the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), it covers courts, it covers prisons, it covers Youth Offending Teams, it covers the Parole Board and it covers probation.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Everybody.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Matthew Ryder, my Deputy Mayor for Social Integration and Community Engagement, was also involved with some of the work that David Lammy was doing. It maybe be sensible for Sophie [Linden] and Matthew to be present because it affects more than one area, for the reasons you alluded to. I do not think we can ignore the points that David Lammy has made. The good news is I decided to have a review before David Lammy’s report in my manifesto because I saw the points you were raising. We have to get this right. We have not got it right yet.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): No. Thank you for that. I will liaise with colleagues and with Sophie and Matthew. Thank you.
2017/3899 - Private Hire Operators Licence Fees Gareth Bacon AM
What is your justification for the vast increases in licence fees for private hire operators?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for your question. I am committed to reviewing operator licence fees as part of my action plan for taxi and private hire services published last September because the current fees were unsustainable and unfair. In the four years since fees were last reviewed, the industry has changed dramatically. Licensed private hire drivers have increased from 65,000 to more than 116,000 and the number of private hire vehicles (PHVs) has increased from 50,000 to 88,000. This brings additional compliance costs. If TfL did not do this, the cost of regulating PHVs would have to be covered elsewhere in TfL, and with the loss of £2.8 billion Government grant, the increase in costs would effectively have been passed on to public transport fare-payers.
The new fees will now reflect the varied size of operators’ fleets and the increase in drivers and vehicles in the sector. It was unfair that until this review an operator with 11 vehicles in its fleet paid the same total fee as one with 30,000. TfL has recruited 250 additional compliance officers to combat illegal activity and to address issues caused by the growing number of licensed drivers and vehicles. Operators will pay 17% of total taxi private hire licensing compliance and enforcement costs. In the next five years, TfL estimates that the cost of enforcing private hire operators will rise from £4 million to £30 million. It is only right that this cost should be borne by the private hire operators who are responsible for this growth, and not passed on to public transport fare-payers.
Gareth Bacon AM: Thank you for that response, Mr Mayor. There was nothing surprising in it, because it was all cribbed from the impact assessment written by TfL’s taxi and private hire
(TPH) department themselves and also in the board papers that went to the TfL Board on 15 September 2017. As chairman of the TfL Board, then can I assume that you support these changes in their entirety?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes.
Gareth Bacon AM: You do. OK, that is fine. Have you discussed with small and medium-sized private hire operators the impact that these proposals will have on their businesses?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): TfL has, yes.
Gareth Bacon AM: Have they? That is interesting. We will come back to that in a moment. The increases that we are talking about range from, at the lowest point, 34% in the first year. If you have a cab firm with 11 to 20 vehicles it is going up by 112%. There are 511 firms in London that that will impact. Between 21 and 50, it goes up by 572.3%. That is 686 companies. Between 51 and 100 cars, it goes up by 962%. That is 190. Are you content that those price increases are reasonable?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): What I was not content with is a situation where previously somebody with 11 vehicles was paying £2,826 and somebody with 11,000 vehicles was paying £2,826. I think TfL are right to bring in increased bands. As a result of the consultation, they have made further changes. There are now a couple more additional tiers within the bands, as you know, and they have allowed instalments to address the issue you are alluding to, where a small to medium-sized operator cannot pay upfront the application fee.
Look, compliance costs are going up. As I have explained, even now with these changes, only 17% of the total regulatory, licensing and compliance costs will come from the operators. There will be another review next year, by the way. We have to make sure that those who use the Tube, buses, London Overground and trams are not having to unnecessarily subsidise PHV operators.
Gareth Bacon AM: I am going to put something to you, Mr Mayor. I am quoting it and it will take a second or two, so please bear with me. I am going to read it out,
“The proposals could mean a number of small or medium-sized specialist operators leaving the market or being deterred from joining the market, which would reduce choice and could increase fares for consumers. This could have an adverse impact on individuals in protected groups who use PHV services to a greater extent than the rest of the general population. The changes may also result in a restricted range of work opportunities for private hire drivers, a large proportion of whom are within protected groups, including part-time workers.”
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That is a fair point somebody is making, but I have to balance the fact that TfL is losing almost £3 billion from the Government. It is unfair, bearing in mind the cost of living concerns raised by Fiona Twycross AM in relation to the last few years,
where public transport fares in TfL went up by 42%, that private hire operation was in a situation where somebody who has 11,000 cars is paying the same amount in fees as someone who has 11 cars. That cannot be right.
Gareth Bacon AM: You have mentioned that twice now, Mr Mayor. As we all know, there is only one operator with 11,000 cars and while I would understand that you would want to refer to that because it is a lot and it would seem inappropriate, nobody is opposed the idea that there should be a graded fee structure. It is the scale of the adjustment of the grading and the consequences it is going to have that seem to be causing the problem. This particular document, which is the paper that went to the TfL Board, goes on to state,
“It is appropriate and justified that operators, drivers and vehicle licensees pay appropriately for the proportionate costs of the licensing regime associated with them.”
It might be appropriate to TfL, but do you think it is appropriate for private hire businesses that have been in operation for decades to face 1,000% increases in their charges?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I will give you another example. If you object to me raising Uber, for reasons we all understand --
Gareth Bacon AM: I am not talking about Uber.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): -- let me raise another example. Somebody who has 100 drivers pays the same as someone who has 11 drivers. Someone who has 600 drivers pays the same as someone who has 11 drivers. Somebody who has 1,000 drivers pays the same as someone who has 11 drivers. It cannot be right that the public transport fare-payer is subsidising operators. I understand it will cause problems for small to medium-sized private hire vehicle operators. That is why TfL have made a couple of big changes, we have added additional tiers and we have added instalment payments as well.
The choice I have as the Chair of TfL is to have a situation where we have to have public transport fare-payers subsidising private hire operators or we allow them to pay more. By the way, it is still only 17%. The rest, 83%, is being subsidised by TfL elsewhere.
Gareth Bacon AM: Mr Mayor, I will pick you up on the example you just gave. You talked about people with 100 cars having to pay the same as people with ten, and as I said in my remarks earlier on, I do not think anybody, including the industry itself, objects to the idea that there should be some change to the current system. Is it really fair? If you have ten times as many vehicles as the smallest operator and their fees go up by 34%, why should yours go up by 962%? That is not proportionate.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I have the operating fees here.
Gareth Bacon AM: So have I. I am quoting directly from them.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure. It is a spectrum of fees depending on the size of your fleet.
Gareth Bacon AM: Yes, but the point I have just made to you, Mr Mayor, is that with ten times the vehicles, why is the charge 800 times different?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Look, TfL have put forward a proposition that was consulted on. I am sure you would have made that point in the response consultation.
Gareth Bacon AM: Yes. 75% opposed it.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): They have made a couple of changes in relation to the points made.
Gareth Bacon AM: Not to the point --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just make this point, Chair: another thing that was welcomed when I announced it - I think it was welcomed, but I am not sure if there has been a u-turn - is quadrupling the number of compliance officers from 80 to 330. Why? Because Londoners were concerned about safety. Now, it was welcomed at the time. Those compliance officers have to be paid for, similarly licensing, similarly regulation. If the Assembly Member has a proposition as to how we can fill that void elsewhere, I am really happy to look at it. Maybe he will put forward an amendment to the budget when it comes forward, but I have to make sure I balance the books. It is the first time in 17 years TfL’s operating costs have gone downwards, not upwards, at the same time as freezing TfL’s fares. I think Londoners welcome that.
Gareth Bacon AM: Mr Mayor, the consequence of this is very likely to be that TfL has nobody to regulate after this has been brought in because people are going to go out of business. I have correspondence in front of me, which I am very happy to send to you, from a multitude of interested parties, including individual cab companies, the London Private Hire Car Association (LPHCA), the Private Hire Board and the GMB Trade Union, who I do not normally quote in public meetings approvingly, but in this case I agree with completely. They are all united in their view that with the scale of the changes that are being implemented by TfL’s Board, the direct result will be decades-old businesses going bust, widespread job losses, less choice for consumers, increased prices and a vastly diminished service. How does this, Mr Mayor, correspond with your ambition to be the most pro-business Mayor that London has ever had?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): You know the worst thing for businesses in London is an extreme Conservative hard Brexit. That is why I am campaigning against it. That demonstrates what a pro-business Mayor I am, Chair.
Gareth Bacon AM: Madam Chairman, this is where you intervene and ask him to answer the question. That was a nonsense answer. Seriously, that was completely --
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): OK.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am sorry, Chair, but with respect --
Gareth Bacon AM: Mr Mayor, that has nothing to do with private hire, absolutely nothing to do with private hire. Listen, can you take this seriously? There are a lot of people whose livelihoods are going to be wiped out by this.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): OK.
Gareth Bacon AM: Can you intervene --
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Assembly Member Bacon, just put your question again.
Gareth Bacon AM: I was doing that but you interrupted me.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): I am sorry.
Gareth Bacon AM: As my last point, Mr Mayor, can I plead with you to intervene with TfL, freeze this, take another look at it, properly consult with the drivers themselves and with the companies and come up with something that is more reasonable than this?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): TfL have consulted with the PHV industry. They have consulted with operators. They have consulted with small businesses. They meet regularly with small and medium-sized businesses. I am reassured their proposals are good ones. I think it is right and proper for PHV operators to pay more than they currently do, particularly when we have seen the growth over the last eight years. Depending on which day of the week you ask a Conservative Member their views, they have been against that growth. I am in favour of a vibrant, flourishing PHV and taxi business in London but I think it is right and proper they pay more towards their licensing, their regulation and their compliance. I do not think it is right and proper for public transport fare-payers on the Tube, the bus, London Overground and trams to be subsidising PHV operators.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): OK, so --
Gareth Bacon AM: Mr Mayor, is your definition of a vibrant industry a dead industry?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, I can give you the figures again that show the thriving industry we have. I am happy to give them to you, Chair, because it is important when students are present that they are informed of the facts. The facts are that we have seen an increase from 65,000 to more than 116,000 drivers --
Gareth Bacon AM: Look at this. This is repetition. He is wasting our time. Could you please stop our clock? He is deliberately wasting our time.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): -- and in vehicles from 50,000 to 88,000. That is a thriving industry.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): OK, thank you.
2017/3877 - Private rented sector Andrew Boff AM
Do you expect to see a sufficient increase in supply of private rented sector homes in London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Chair. The private rented sector has grown substantially in recent years and that increase looks set to continue. In 1990, around 11% of households in London were renting privately. That has now risen to over 28% and according to one forecast, on current trends the private rented sector to grow to accommodate 40% of London households by 2040. We know that part of this increase is the result of new homes being built, but much of it comes from growth of the private rented sector within homes that already exist. That is why, as well as making sure we boost the supply of newly-built homes for private rent, we need to make sure all Londoners who rent get a better deal. Over 2 million Londoners, including over 500,000 children, already live in the private rented sector. We need to do all we can to help with the challenges they face over costs, standards and stability.
While clearly any private homes can usually be rented out by their owner, where I can have the greatest impact is by encouraging the growth of purpose-built private rented housing, often known as “build-to-rent”. Build to rent can be a good thing. High-quality, well-designed homes with longer tenancy, stable rent increases and higher standards of management are to be welcomed. Build to rent developments can also have clear benefits in terms of boosting overall housing supply in London. They can be built more quickly than conventional development for sale, they tap into a broader market and they can attract new investment. My draft London Housing Strategy sets out a package of support for new build to rent supply in London. I have been very encouraged by the positive response to this guidance by the sector and by the continued growth in the pipeline of new build to rent homes. There are estimated to be more than 9,000 build-to-rent homes under construction in London now, equivalent to 15% of all private housing building and another 22,000 granted planning permission.
Andrew Boff AM: Thank you. In light of Jeremy Corbyn’s [The Rt Hon Jeremy Corbyn MP, Leader of the Labour Party] recent comments in favour of rent controls would you rule out the use of rent control in London and oppose any attempt to introduce it?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I think we need to control the level of rent increases in London. One of the things that I welcome about build to rent is they have longer tenancies, up to three years, and during those three years the rent only goes up by inflation, which is one of the reasons why build to rent has led to big demands from Londoners. I also welcome the announcement from Sajid Javid [Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government] who recognises that rents going up too much. I welcome the conversion, the u-turn if you like, of the Conservative Party to bring some control to rent levels in London.
Andrew Boff AM: It is a world of u-turns. Therefore, do you not stand by your commitment to me in the May 2016 MQT that you have no plans to introduce rent control?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It depends how you define rent control. Nobody is suggesting going back to a New York system of the 1970s. What we are talking about is stabilising rents. There are different rules we can talk about, whether it is Paris, Berlin or New York. What I am in favour of is a longer tenancy where the rent is only going up by inflation, rather than ridiculous 10%, 12%, 15% increases, every 12 months you do not pay a fee to letting agent. In between those three or four-year tenancies of course they can go up not unreasonably by the landlords. I do not think anybody is talking about 1970s style rent control system, neither Jeremy [Corbyn] nor John Healey [The Rt Hon John Healey MP, Member of Parliament for Wentworth and Dearne].
Andrew Boff AM: Would you come forward with your proposals for rent control in London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): What I am working on is a London model and the London model is an idea which I set up in my draft Housing Strategy. The idea is speaking to tenants and to landlords about a template which we can persuade the Government to use going forward. One of the concerns landlords raised with me, for example, is the issue of gaining access to a property for legitimate reasons and one of the issues raised by tenants is the issue of security of tenure and also rent increases. The London model will be a way of going forward and I am happy to come back to you once we have that ready after consultation. That will be sent to Government, the offer made to renters and landlords in London.
Andrew Boff AM: Will you take into account the Cambridge University study which found that rent controls would reduce the supply of Private Rented Sector (PRS) homes at a time when we need to increase them?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Again, it depends on the definition of what you mean by rent control. I am in favour of stabilising rents in London, controlling the rents in London. I am not talking about a 1970s model and nor is the Labour Party. John Healey is doing work as we speak consulting people around the country about what form of model that should be. By the way, even the Conservative Party has done a welcome u-turn on this issue and I welcome that. I hope the Conservatives in the Assembly will also see sense.
Andrew Boff AM: The quote from Jeremy Corbyn is, “Rent controls exist in many cities around the world and I want our cities to have those powers too”. Which model are you using?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am not using any model. I am using my model, the London model. I think the point Jeremy was making is that around the world in what you would call capitalist cities - and I am not talking about Venezuela, God forbid - have used a form of rent control, successful cities, from Berlin to Paris to other parts of the world. There is no reason we should be scared of this. I welcome the fact that the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government is now talking about this and we want to push him further.
Andrew Boff AM: So presumably you will not be using the rent control which was used in Stockholm which led to a chronic shortage in housing and an average wait of 21 years for a new home?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am not a big fan of the Swedish model, no.
Andrew Boff AM: Nor the model in Manhattan where young people have to regularly check the death columns in order to get accommodation that is affordable to them?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am in favour of a London model.
Andrew Boff AM: Thank goodness you have written off the Venezuela model. Could you have your word with your party Leader so that he can write off the Venezuela model?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Just for your information, if you do speak to the Prime Minister soon, Venezuela is on Planet Earth.
Andrew Boff AM: Sorry, I did not understand that.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The point I make is that anybody below the age of 50 who lives in London understands this is a big problem and I am astonished that the Conservatives in this Assembly do not think it is a big problem.
Andrew Boff AM: It is an enormous problem and you know we consider it an enormous problem.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The price of rent in London is exorbitant. It costs the same price to rent a one-bedroom property in London than a three-bedroom home in any other part of England. That cannot be right.
Andrew Boff AM: You will be familiar with Professor Christine Whitehead, who is the housing expert at the London School of Economics, who confirmed that rent controls only work where you do not need them.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That is the point. The definition of rent controls that some Members of the Conservative Party are using shows they are stuck in the 1970s rather than 2017.
2017/3831 - Private Rented Sector - London Rogue Landlord database Caroline Pidgeon AM
What is the timescale for the release of the London Rogue Landlord database?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for your question. I am committed to helping London’s 2 million private renters to get a better deal. That includes by doing what I can to
drive out the minority of criminal landlords and letting agents in the capital. My ‘name and shame’ database on which information will be easily and publicly available to Londoners for the first time is a key part of this. I am pleased to say this database will launch by the end of this year. Initially the database will include details of landlords and letting agents who have faced enforcement action by six London boroughs or the London Fire Brigade. The London Fire Brigade and the six London boroughs, Brent, Camden, Kingston, Newham, Southwark and Sutton, have worked with my team to develop and test the database over the course of this year.
Following the launch we are keen to bring on board the remaining London boroughs, many of whom I know are standing ready to do so. By being publicly accessible we intend the database to deter bad practice in the sector and allow tenants to check landlords or agents before they sign a rental agreement. Currently landlords know a lot about a prospective tenant, but a tenant knows very little about their landlord. This database is the first step towards making the rental market fairer and more transparent for tenants, empowering Londoners to make better choices about who they rent from. Parallel to my work, Government is developing a national rogue landlord database solely for use by local authorities. I believe Government should make this national database public so that tenants across the UK have access to this information.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: Thank you for your answer. Can I just be clear, will landlords convicted of fire safety offences be included on the rogue landlord database?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: Will that include both local authority information, as they obviously hold a lot of fire safety information about private landlords, and also the enforcement work taken by London Fire Brigade?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: Brilliant, OK. Will all that information be on straight away with the pilot or will it be once it is rolled out?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): There will be a public tier and a private tier. The public tier will have these prosecutions listed for a year, based on the advice we have received regarding the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, because it is spent after a year. So, it will be listed on the public tier for a year after conviction; there will be a private tier available to councils and information will be held on there longer. I think it will be ten years on the private tier. The good news is there has been interest from other boroughs other than the six and once we are live, do not be surprised if others come on board pretty quickly.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: What is your timescale to have all of the other boroughs on to your database?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I cannot force them; it is a voluntary scheme. There is interest already there. We will launch the first six and the London Fire Brigade this year. I will
be disappointed if by the end of next year there were not more on board, but I suspect there will be tranches, because it depends how good their information is. Those that are licensing boroughs will probably be more advanced, those that are not may be a bit behind.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: OK, very good. It is a really important tool for those who rent privately. As you said earlier, 28% going up potentially to 40%, we really need to protect those tenants.
Related to this, do you agree with the Information Commissioner’s statement that public organisations holding relevant fire safety information should publish these records proactively?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I think it is really important, particularly post-Grenfell, that there be maximum transparency so people can make choices themselves. I caution that with one thing: we do not want to spread panic or alarm. I say this not in an arrogant or patronising way, but sometimes laypeople do not understand the nuances of what a report inspection says. As long as it is explained in language that people were not alarmed by, unless there is reason to be alarmed, I think transparency is always a good thing.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: Have you taken any action on this recommendation from the Information Commissioner?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes. The London Fire Brigade (LFB) are doing renewed inspections of the various properties across London, 33 councils, and they are in discussions with councils about those inspections about the work they have done since the last inspection post-Grenfell. Do not be surprised if quite a few of those things are made public.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: You are going to make sure, as much as within your power --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Exactly. What limited powers I have, but also what we do not want to do is cause panic and alarm. For example, somebody could make a choice as the consequence of reading an inspection to leave a building and go somewhere less safe than the building they are already. We have to be careful about not unnecessarily spreading panic or alarm. You have to be responsible with the information.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: OK, thank you. Another question relating to the private rented sector: from 1 April 2018 private rented properties will require a minimum energy performance rating of E in terms of their energy performance certificate, and in your draft Environment Strategy you say you are going to work with local authorities to enforce these regulations for energy efficiency. How are you going to be able to enforce these regulations and are you going to be providing any resources to help local authorities?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It is not for us to enforce local authorities. I believe in devolution. I believe in devolution as low down as possible. I am not in favour of taking powers away from local authorities or stepping on their toes. It is about conversations and talking to them. We are doing more and more work with local authorities with the local boroughs PRS partnership. All 33 boroughs are on there. We have met a few times, my team and them. That
has led me to be very confident about the willingness from local authorities to work in this area. One of the reasons we are doing that is to improve enforcement and to drive up standards. The good news is there is an appetite there. The bad news is local authorities are stretched financially, as indeed we are. We have to make the case why it is worth doing this and demand from consumers and politicians helps.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: Once this is up and running and there are potentially prosecutions for lack of energy efficiency, will that also feature on your database?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That is a good question. At the moment that is not the plan, because it is landlords with criminal convictions, rogue landlords, but because of public opinion moving, because we know the seriousness of bad energy in homes, we need to think about making information more transparent. It is a balance to be struck, because obviously what we do not want to do is inadvertently penalise landlords who are taking action. That is one of the things under discussion, what we could publish in the future. At the moment we are quite clear in relation to what we are going to publish: criminal prosecutions from enforcement teams, health and safety, London Fire Brigade, but we will keep it under review. That is one of the reasons why the London Boroughs Private Rented Sector Partnership is such an important forum.
Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: OK, thank you very much.
2017/4007 - Counter Terrorism Unmesh Desai AM
The Head of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, Sara Thornton, has warned that the pressures on policing are ‘not sustainable’ within existing budgets. (https://news.npcc.police.uk/releases/police-funding-do-we-have-the-resources-we-need) Given that the new level of terror threat appears to be a shift on police demands and not a spike, how are you working with the Metropolitan Police Service to manage these pressures?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for your question, Assembly Member Desai. Thank you for the recent Budget and Performance Committee report, Who’s paying the Bill? which looks at the financial challenge for the MPS. My Deputy Mayor for Police and Crime is currently reviewing the report and we will respond to the findings once we have thoroughly considered the proposals set out. It is essential that the Government provide the additional resources the police so badly need to keep Londoners safe. Chief Constable Sara Thornton [CBE QPM], Chair of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, said last month the counter-terror funding for policing is being cut than more than 7% in the next three years. This is on top of the funding crisis in the local policing budgets. We know that policing terrorist events have cost implications for local policing. Each one puts a huge strain on police and resources, mobilising specialist operations and pulling officers into extra shifts and away from daily duties. For every pound spent from the counter-terrorist budget in response to the Westminster attack, a further £2 was spent by local policing.
Supporting counter-terrorism funding is not sufficient if funding for local policing is falling. Falling resilience of local neighbourhood policing will cut off the intelligence that is so crucial to preventing attacks. Only this week I met with the New York Police Commissioner to discuss policing in two of the world’s greatest metropolises. The number of police officers per head of population in London is over 20% smaller than that of New York and yet due to funding pressures we are likely to go below 30,000 police officers. Clearly this is not good enough. This dangerous under-funding simply cannot be allowed to continue. When I met the Prime Minister earlier this week I made that point, that the Government must end the under-funding which is putting the safety of the British public at risk.
Unmesh Desai AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have three or four questions to ask you, so if I can ask you to be as brief as possible. Amber Rudd [The Rt Hon Amber Rudd MP, Home Secretary] said recently that it is too simplistic to blame police cuts when asked about anti- terrorist operations and of course I accept there are many factors at play here. We know what [Chief Constable] Sara Thornton has had to say about this and I quote what she said, that resources have got to be part of the organisation. It seems to me that there is a discrepancy here, certainly in in terms of emphasis on the funding situation. Who is right?
In particular, again carrying on with the theme of resources, on Tuesday the Department for Transport updated guidance to local councils on terrorism. The last time such guidance was issued was in 2003. Local authorities have been asked to improve street lighting, sensitive blind spots, amongst many other things, all of which of course requires money. Would you agree with me the Department of Transport cannot have it both ways, asking local authorities to do all these things, which are very important, such as street lighting, but not then telling them where the money is going to come from? Would you liaise with London Councils and other relevant agencies to get this message across to the Department for Transport?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Firstly, the responsibility for terrorism lies with terrorists. Let us be clear, they are to blame for the terrorism, but there are things we can do to try and minimise the chances of terrorists succeeding, to thwart terrorist attacks, but also, when they happen, to minimise the harm and the fatalities. The police advice is that police be treated as a whole and resources is a factor. However, you are right, we cannot put the responsibility on to councils to do further stuff but not give them the resources. I will be lobbying the Government to provide the resources that we need.
Unmesh Desai AM: I accept that answer. Very quickly, because I am aware of the time that I have, it has been reported recently that a key ingredient used in the bombs in Parsons Green and in Manchester were hydrogen peroxide, which is commonly available. Since March last year, the sale of this particular item has been restricted, but Chris Hunter [QGM], a former bomb disposal expert, tells us through The Times that the substance is still fairly easy to purchase and that some outlets will not conduct the necessary checks. In particular what is worrying is sales through online sites. How are you or how do you intend to work with the Home Office and other agencies to ensure that online and retailers are doing everything they can to stop these materials getting into the wrong hands? We have the same situation with acid attacks and sulfuric acid.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure. There are the industrial materials and then there are the consumer retail ones. We need to tighten up on the industrial and the retail. The counter- terror lead, [Assistant Commissioner] Mark Raleigh, is well aware of this and is in discussions with the Home Office in relation to this issue.
Unmesh Desai AM: Finally, your response to the Harris review [London’s preparedness to respond to a major terrorist incident]; you told us at the Police and Crime Committee that it will be out some time in October. We are very nearly halfway through October. Have you got a date in mind?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The Harris review was published on 27 October last year. Do not be surprised if our response is published on 27 October this year.
Unmesh Desai AM: Thank you.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Assembly Member Dismore.
Andrew Dismore AM: Can I ask about the detective shortage in the MPS, which has been a problem for some time, which clearly impacts on counter-terrorism as well. In the summer, it was reported the MPS was recruiting an additional 80 trainee detective constables with full police powers who have never worked as uniformed officers. Assistant Commissioner Gallan apparently wrote to every detective due to retire this year and asked them to stay on, as the force at that time was short of 748 detectives. The employment agency, reported as having set up its own office in Scotland Yard, is charging the MPS hundreds of thousands of pounds to recruit 77 detectives who have just retired on full pension and the reports of stressed detectives being bombarded with 20 cases at once who are quitting the role and going back to uniform, which is all pretty serious. Can you say how many detectives the MPS is currently short and what the barriers are, as you see them, to filling the vacancies and what progress is being made in recruiting detectives to fill those vacancies?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): There are a number of things we are doing to fill the vacancies of detectives. It is a nationwide issue, as you know, across England and Wales. You will be aware, and you referred to this in your question, Deputy Commissioner Craig Mackey [QPM] wrote to retired detective constables in relation to them coming back to coach, coming back to be civilian detectives and other roles they could play. That is one of the things that the Deputy Commissioner did. Secondly, more coaching, more training of those who are police officers to train them up to be detectives. I appreciate your concerns about response time, but thirdly you will be aware of one of the advantages of the BCU is getting detectives doing complex cases. This is a national problem though and we are doing what we can. There are still shortages in London and that is one of the reasons why one of the operational advantages of the BCUs is detectives being able to do complex cases because of the mergers.
Andrew Dismore AM: How many are we short at present?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): There is a figure which I can send to you.
Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you.
2017/4103 - Z/Yen Global Financial Futures Peter Whittle AM
On 11 September 2017, the Z/Yen global financial centres index (GFCI) published their latest study, ranking 92 global financial centres on factors such as access to high-quality staff and infrastructure. New York City was 24 points behind London, representing the biggest gap between the two centres since the survey began in 2007. London remains the world’s top finance centre, ahead of both New York City and Hong Kong, defying ‘Project Fear’ predictions that financiers would lose confidence in the UK. (http://www.cityam.com/271735/london- retains-financial-services-crown-city-extends-lead) Will the Mayor join with me in congratulating the City of London once again in maintaining its position as the world’s leading financial centre - despite Brexit?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, for the avoidance of doubt, can I just clarify the misapprehension in the question, which is that Brexit has not happened. I am proud that London has some of the most talented financiers, lawyers and business professionals in the world. Last month’s Z/Yen Global Financial Centre’s survey that was referred to in the question was collected within a 24-month period up to June 2017, a period in which the UK voted to leave the European Union, but has continued to be part of it for the integrated single market and customs union. All the reasons I believe London is the world’s leading financial services centre are endorsed by the survey’s respondents. Our legal system is world renowned and instils confidence in investors. Our regulations are fair and our tax rates are competitive, our unique concentration of finance and professional services firms is unrivalled. London’s key strength builds on centuries of expertise and experience.
They also build on our membership of the EU and its benefits for London and the UK, such as access to the single market and to the talent of 1 million Europeans who live, study and work in our City. The Z/Yen Global Financial Centre’s index also mentions the concern survey respondents had around the uncertainty caused by Brexit. This fact alone has forced some of London’s banks and insurance firms to get ready to move jobs to the Continent. 9,770 roles are officially at risk, according to the City of London Corporation. One of the issues raised in the survey was, and I quote, “The fear that London will become an also-ran after Brexit”. I hope and believe London will continue to be a strong financial centre and global hub for the world’s businesses, but when Brexit happens we should not pretend there is not a big risk to our economy if we do not get it right.
Peter Whittle AM: Thank you. I take it that you are pleased about London retaining its position, Mr Mayor?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes.
Peter Whittle AM: I hope that you also congratulate the fact and are pleased about the fact that the Dutch firm, TMF, has decided to have its headquarters here and has seen Brexit not as
a barrier to choosing London but in fact as an opportunity. You say that we have not left, and you keep saying this, but the fact is that before we had the referendum all of the arguments were basically about how quite quickly, quite soon, there would be a recession and also that people would start to move from London, which has not happened. I know I have said this in the past two occasions on this Question Time, but I think that as Mayor should you not be promoting London and all the good things about London and the good economic news about London, rather than saying constantly that there is doubt about what is going to happen?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Crikey. I am often criticised for being too optimistic. I have never been criticised for being a doom merchant. I think it is the greatest city in the world and the answer I just gave to you explained why: the underlying strengths of London; our legal system; our fair and competitive tax rates; our unique concentration of financial services and our ecosystem, which will stay even after we have left Brexit. When I meet chief executives, I make that very point.
Peter Whittle AM: The point is, Mr Mayor, that they would all be going like lemmings at the moment if what you said about Brexit was the case. This is just today - the good news keeps coming, I can barely keep up with it myself - look, “London retains global top spot”. You would be the first to say that business obviously needs certainty, therefore is it not rather dangerous to do what you do, which is talk about second referendums and things like this? This is not really the sort of thing that creates certainty for business in London.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Sure. You talk about certainty. Can you tell us the terms of trade we are going to do with the EU when we leave the EU? What will the tariff be on goods?
Peter Whittle AM: This is not the point. You are going off the point, Mr Mayor. The fact is - -
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): You are well off the point. In your last few minutes, get back to the Z/Yen Global Financial Futures. Any more questions on that to the Mayor?
Peter Whittle AM: No, I think I have run out of time.
2017/4069 - Bail and release without restriction Onkar Sahota AM
Following the introduction of legislation in April 2017, have fewer people in London been released on police bail and more people released under investigation?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for your question. The old system of police bail was not working efficiently and some people were left in limbo for unnecessary protracted periods of time. Change was needed. The new system has already seen fewer people released on police bail and more people released under investigation. This is a direct consequence of the change in legislation regarding police bail that came into effect in April this year. In line with national trends, the numbers of people released on pre-charge bail has dropped significantly.
Based on the first four months of the new legislation, the percentage of suspects released on bail has dropped from 35% to 6% within the MPS. Prior to the new legislation there was no option to release a person under investigation. In August, the percentage released within this category was 28%. When taken together, these two new categories roughly equate to those on pre-charge bail on the old system. That is 34% under the new system and 35% under the old legislation.
However, it is important to note that this change is still in its early days and full data is currently only available for the first four months of the new legislation. As a consequence of this, it is too early to draw full conclusions about the effectiveness of this new process. However, MOPAC will continue to monitor it. Through discussions with the Commissioner and her team, we will continue to seek assurance from the MPS that they have in place robust performance information to monitor these changes and that they are seeking to understand what effect these changes are having. It is vital that we are reassured that the new system ensures that those who should be brought to justice are and that victims and witnesses are not let down by the criminal justice system.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM: Thank you for that answer, Mr Mayor. I can understand the legislation is intended to reduce the amount of time people are on bail unnecessarily. However, this has also put extra pressure on the police force. There has been a report in The Daily Mail and in The Times of murderers, rape and terror suspects being released under investigation without proper bail conditions on them. The CPS did say that if an upper limit is thought to be absolutely necessary, it needs to be set in a realistic amount of time which takes account of the complexity and difficulty of cases and does not put the prosecutor at a disadvantage. At 28 days it would be wholly inappropriate and unworkable, given the reality of police resources and the conflicting demands. The question I am really making here is that obligation placed on the police, they are under-funded, there are not enough detectives and what is happening is the police force are being stretched and cannot comply and they are therefore using the bail less appropriately than they were previously.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It is just worth reminding colleagues, who are not experts like you, that the advantage of bailing somebody is you can put conditions on their bail, whereas releasing somebody who is under investigation you can have no conditions. There are very good reasons often where it takes the police time to determine whether somebody should be charged or there should be no further action: the availability of witnesses, the processing of forensic evidence, deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) stuff, looking at digital evidence, trying to retrieve this, getting advice from the CPS. The concern you are expressing is the concern that actually are we inadvertently making the police do a huge amount of work in the first 28 days for fear of having to release somebody who should be charged?
I accept that concern that you have, particularly at a time where we have seen police resources go down, crimes becoming more complex and police resources being more stretched. On the other hand, we all know of examples where people who were arrested were kept on bail for ages and ages and ages and the uncertainty, stress and anxiety that caused them and their families. There is a balance to be struck. My view is this: if the Government was going to move to this new system, which I broadly welcome, they should have given the police more resources to
reach the conclusion they need to reach within the 28 days, because after 28 days a senior officer has to decide whether to extend to three months and a magistrate exceptionally for six months. The alternative is somebody being released who probably should not be without conditions and that is the concern that victims and some of the newspapers you referred to are expressing. I make the point again, it goes back to resources from the Government. If you change the legislation and the consequence is stretching the police, give them the resources so they are not stretched.
Dr Onkar Sahota AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. This is something which Londoners will be watching out for. I really congratulate you on your continued campaign on behalf of Londoners that we get more resources for the police service, which we require so desperately.
2017/3900 – Alzheimer’s sufferers on TfL services Keith Prince
Can you highlight how your Transport Strategy will seek to aid those who travel on TfL services that suffer from Alzheimer’s?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I thank you for asking this really important question on a really important issue. I am committed to making London, including the transport network, dementia friendly. We must make sure our services help people with the condition so they can lead full and active lives for as long as they can. Helping those who are vulnerable is the very essence of a civilised society. As our population ages, this is becoming more important for London and across the country. My draft Transport Strategy sets out how TfL would use a Healthy Streets approach. This will improve our services and street design to help Londoners to make active travel choices, to help them keep healthy and tackle the onset of dementia. I am also committed to make sure London’s transport network is accessible for all Londoners. That is why I am investing a record £200 million for step-free access on the London Underground over five years. For those living with dementia, my draft Transport Strategy sets out priorities to ensure they can travel safely.
My strategy includes a commitment to inclusive design, ensuring stations and vehicles and streets meet the needs of everyone. It also sets out plans to improve staff training and customer information, which are as important as infrastructure design. Since I became Mayor, we are recruiting 650 new station staff and TfL is now training staff in how to assist customers with accessibility requirements, including people with invisible impairments. A trained dementia friends champion is now delivering information sessions to staff across the organisation. TfL provide clear and precise customer information to enable people with conditions like dementia to plan their journeys. This helps them and their loved ones feel safe and assured while travelling. TfL is also reviewing signage at stations to ensure it is accessible and intuitive.
In July this year, TfL officially launched the “Please offer me a seat” badge, which is helping many customers with invisible impairments, including those living with dementia, to use the transport network. As part of my commitment to London becoming the world’s first dementia-
friendly capital city, my health advisor, Dr Tom Coffey [OBE], is working closely with the Alzheimer’s Society to get City Hall staff trained as dementia friends.
Keith Prince AM: Thank you very much indeed for that answer, Mr Mayor. Can I push my luck a bit and could I ask you to agree to a meeting with myself and the Alzheimer’s Society to discuss the challenges that people with memory loss face when travelling around London and how TfL can go further to help make their journeys easier and safer?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes, and can I also, Chair, suggest that Dr Tom Coffey comes with me to that meeting and anybody else we think may help, because we are in the ideas business here, because we want to be beacons on being the world’s first dementia-friendly city, so any ideas gratefully received, particularly from those who --
Keith Prince AM: Thank you very much, thank you.
2017/4008 - Demands on the Metropolitan Police Service requiring redeployment of officers Andrew Dismore AM
Recent major incidents in the capital have imposed unprecedented demands on the Metropolitan Police Service, requiring redeployment of officers into the response to, and investigation of, these incidents from their usual duties, including from Borough Basic Command Units as well as specialist units. What is your assessment of the impact of this demand on the day in, day out policing needs of Londoners?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Assembly Member Dismore, you are quite right to point out the unprecedented demand placed on the MPS and I thank you for recognising this. I cannot stress enough just how challenging the current situation is and how important it is that the Government is made fully aware of the budgetary impact. As I have set out before, the MPS is facing a unique challenge of greatly reduced resourcing at a time of increasing demand. The change in nature of crime, the shift in the threat of terrorism, the impacts of large and complex investigations such as Grenfell Tower, and the rise in pernicious crimes like sexual violence, domestic abuse, acid attacks and moped crime.
Set against this challenge is years of systematic budgetary cuts from the Government. Since 2012, the MPS has made over £600 million in savings and yet it now has to make another £400 million by 2021. Although I welcome the additional 1% pay-rise for police officers this year, without funding attached it merely represents an additional cost, which will lead to pressure elsewhere. Let me be clear, my first priority is to keep Londoners safe and I have done all I can to mitigate the impact of these cuts, increasing the policing council tax precept by the full 1.99%. Now the Government must do its bit.
It is important to be honest and upfront with Londoners, the MPS funding has been cut in real terms year on year since 2012. London’s population has continued to rise and the MPS funding per head has fallen by 20% in the last five years, the highest of any police force in the country.
The scale of this police funding crisis has already led to the loss of almost 3,000 police community support officers, most of the capital’s police station front counters, and 120 police buildings in order to protect frontline police officers. Officer numbers will fall and are now at risk of dipping below 30,000 for the first time since 2003, just as they are needed the most.
Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you for your comprehensive answer. As you say, the MPS is currently facing this huge demand due to the Grenfell Tower investigation, the six thwarted terrorist attacks, the four terrorist attacks that went through between March and September this year, the rise in crime, the 999 calls, and a number of other specialist investigations. There have been suggestions from some quarters that you should reconsider your target to have 32,000 officers in the Metropolitan Police Service in the light of this dire funding shortage the Conservative Government is inflicting on the Metropolitan Police Service. Already we have seen a fall of 941 officers since last year to just over 30,000, while overall crime is up 5.6%. Is a further cut in numbers something that you are actively considering and what would the impact be on the MPS’ ability to respond with even fewer officers to these unprecedented multiple pressures while also trying to keep London safe and the service operating in the boroughs?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I think you have articulated it in your first question and in your current one, an understanding of some of the challenges we face as a global city. Just to give you a comparative contrast, I met the New York Commissioner of Police this week, population of 8.6 million in New York - we have 8.8 million - they have 36,000-plus officers. We have just over 30,000, as you alluded to. What I am saying to the Government is unless they guarantee additional funding, do a u-turn on the cuts they are planning, we will go below 30,000 probably in the course of the next 12 months, because when it comes to recruitment, we have to recruit months and months in advance. If it is the case I have no certainty of funding going forward, because police officers, as you know, cannot be made redundant, you cannot fire them - for very good reasons, by the way - we have to plan about not recruiting additional police officers.
You raised the issue about the strategic target of 32,000 officers. If it is the case for the foreseeable future we are not going to have a change of heart from the Government, question, what is the point of having a target that will never be met?
Andrew Dismore AM: I think that is an important point and when officers are switched to these specialist investigations they are not new officers. However, officers from other teams who are being redeployed and they are being asked to do longer shifts and to cancel rest days. We know that the MPS has been extending eight-hour shifts to 12 hours to deal with the increased demand and some officers who have recently left have said that 12 hours is routinely being stretched to 16 hours. Do you think it is fair to ask officers to do these challenging hours and do you think the Government understands the scale of the problem their lack of funding for the police is causing?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I say, I would have hoped genuinely that a Prime Minister who was a former Home Secretary would get it because of spending so much time with police officers. Chief Superintendent Gavin Thomas, who is the President of the Police Superintendents’ Association, he said recently,
“I suggest we have a perfect storm developing, comprised of fewer resources, reduced public services, new threats, and a widening increase in some types of traditional crime. If the model for delivering policing services in the future is fewer people working longer, each doing every more, then I suggest that model is fundamentally flawed.”
I agree with him.
Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you.
2017/3939 - Toxicity Charge Caroline Russell AM
What will be the benefits of the Emissions Surcharge (also known as T-Charge) in tackling air pollution?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I thank you for your continued support on this really important issue. As I am sure Members will be aware, last week I published new data on PM2.5 exposure in London. These are tiny toxic air particles so small they can be ingested deep into the lungs, causing respiratory and cardiovascular diseases as well as cancer. The data reveals that every resident of London is living in areas that break these guidelines. Thousands of people die prematurely in our city every year as a direct consequence of poor air. In addition to reduced life expectancy, air pollution has also been linked to asthma, strokes, heart disease and dementia.
As you have alluded, this month I will be introducing the T-Charge, a £10 levy on the oldest pollution vehicles entering London. It is due to start on 23 October and it will be the toughest emissions standard enforced by any major city. It is a significant step towards implementing an Ultra Low Emissions Zone with even tougher standards.
I am delighted to report, Chair, these measures are already having a positive impact on our air quality even ahead of the launch of the T-Charge. Since April, around 96,000 people have used TfL’s new online vehicle checker to find out if their vehicle will be affected by the T-Charge. TfL estimate that only around 6,000 non-compliant vehicles enter the centre of the city on an average weekday. When I announced the T-Charge, the estimate was 10,000 non-compliant vehicles. Over the last year, the number of non-compliant vehicles has therefore fallen. We expect this to reduce further as the T-Charge goes live. We have also seen a significant fall in the UK sales of diesel vehicles. Diesel sales fell 21% in August, dropping the fuel share below 40%. Auto News attributed this partially to the T-Charge. Our policies are working. They will make London’s air cleaner and they will help to improve the health of Londoners.
However, I cannot solve the problem as quickly as I would like. London needs the Government’s help most importantly by reducing the financial impact on London’s poorest communities and that is why I am lobbying for a diesel scrappage fund and I will raise this with the Prime Minister when I met her earlier this week.
Caroline Russell AM: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor, and we both want Londoners to be able to trust the air they breathe and Londoners keep telling us all that they want clean air. It is really good that you are seeing pre-compliance and in terms of complying with the T-Charge. It is a small step. However, it is that first important step on the way to getting the really tough regulation and having proper clean air, so thank you for that update.
I want to raise an issue, I had a group of children come and visit me here at City Hall a couple of weeks ago from Bessemer Grange Primary School in Herne Hill. They are watching on the live stream right now. Shiloh, Imogen, Oliver and Mark asked me to ask you to help them to cut pollution on their journey to school. They are very worried about delays to Quietway 7 in the West Norwood area, therefore my question is will you, or your Walking and Cycling Commissioner, help to mediate between the borough, Transport for London, and local people, to get Quietway 7 completed so Bessemer Grange children can help you clean up London’s air by scooting, walking and cycling, to school in safety?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I say hello to Shiloh, Imogen and Mark, and all the pupils watching at Bessemer Grange Primary School? The idea of politicians getting ordinary residents of London to have their questions asked is a cracking idea. I might suggest that to the Leader of my party to do at Prime Minister’s Questions! The good news to those pupils, Caroline - and thanks for raising this really important issue - is that my Walking and Cycling Commissioner, Dr Will Norman, and Transport for London had a very positive meeting with Councillor [Jennifer] Braithwaite, the Cabinet Member for Lambeth, on 22 September and following that meeting, Councillor Braithwaite has confirmed support for design proposals on Quietway 7 in the West Norwood area. These will soon be published on the Lambeth website for public comment. Following this, Lambeth will need to grant final scheme approval later this year for construction to begin in 2018 and we will continue to work with TfL, with Lambeth, with Assembly Member Eshalomi, and with anybody else who wants to make sure this is a successful scheme. Thank you, Shiloh, Imogen and Mark, for raising this with Caroline Russell.
Caroline Russell AM: Thank you very much, Mr Mayor, I am sure the children will be really, really excited about this.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): When you can vote, when you are old enough, please vote for me.
Caroline Russell AM: Or the person who raised their question, Mr Mayor. Finally, you recently announced 50 air quality audits for primary schools in pollution hotspots. These audits are incredibly welcome. However, there are another 350 schools on the list of the worst-polluted places in London. Will you provide additional funding for these remaining schools to have audits in the next financial year?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It is a good question. We started with the 50 to pilot them and see how successful they were going to be. We cannot do it by ourselves. It has got to be led by boroughs working with the schools, working with the parents and the local community, and they are doing that. If it is successful, we will try to encourage other boroughs to use them
with their schools as well. However, just to be clear, we cannot impose on schools and councils what to do here. Often, they are not TfL roads, and so we have no locus. What we can do is work in with councils and schools. I visited a very good school in Islington with Councillor Claudia Webbe and there was a good example there of a school working with the council and the councillors to get improvements around there, and I am willing to work with councillors and schools to improve the air quality around their schools.
Caroline Russell AM: That is great. They will want a bit of money as well, because the boroughs are all really cash-strapped, though I am out of time.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Assembly Member Russell, thank you for that.
2017/3997 - Update on T-Charge Leonie Cooper AM
Could the Mayor update on progress toward the implementation of the new T-Charge on 23 October, including any updated modelling showing its impact after it is up and running?
Leonie Cooper AM: I would like to come back to the topic of the T-Charge, the emissions surcharge, which her question sort of was about in the first place, and I would like to ask the Mayor about the specifics to do with implementation. I know you have been very committed to trying to get the Government to step up with the Clean Air Act and diesel scrappage. However, obviously we are just a few days away now from the launch and I wondered if you could tell us about how well we are now prepared for everything going live on the 23rd and what will it mean for Londoners when it goes live.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just say, we have tried to learn the lessons from the C- Charge back in 2003 and one of the things that Ken Livingstone as Mayor did really well was the planning to get the implementation right. Nicky [Nicky Gavron AM] was around back then. It is really important to get these things right. The amount of work taking place in advance of 23 October is phenomenal and I want to pay tribute to Transport for London, my Deputy Mayor Val Shawcross [Deputy Mayor for Transport], because we have to get it right. As I said, the good news is we have seen a change in behaviour already, so those who were against this, and they sit on that part of the Assembly, have to explain to Londoners why they are against this when we have already seen 4,000 fewer non-complying cars coming into central London, which means air quality already improving. The key thing is this, Leonie, if we get this right, it gives me confidence to ride up the Ultra Low Emission Zone.
The T-Charge we think is relatively easy because we are using vehicles that are Euro 4. I have said to the Department for Transport (DfT), “If you give us some data from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency , we are having problems with them showing us this data, we will think we will get it right. There may be one or two teething problems, but fingers crossed”. However, the real challenge is going to be the Ultra Low Emission Zone. No one has tried that before on this scale. By the way, I say this, colleagues often say to me, and those who are non- governmental organisations and campaigners, genuinely trying to challenge me, “This
community around the world is doing this” or, “This city is doing this” and nothing near the scale of what we are trying in London. Our population is massive. The T-Charge area is massive and so to get this right is a difficult task. I am confident we are going to get it right and, if we do get it right, it is thanks to the hard work of Valand the team at TfL.
Leonie Cooper AM: Thanks very much, Mr Mayor, and I completely agree, we are way ahead of cities around the world. People talking about a diesel ban in 2025 and here we are literally days away from launching the T-Charge. I wonder if I can just tease out a little bit more some questions that have come up from Londoners to do with things like is there going to be some sort of soft landing period so that people get an initial warning, because this is a big change? What are the arrangements? Will people be aware, if they have a blue badge, is there something specific they need to do or is that already taken care of?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): We have done a lot of work with the blue badge community and residents in the area for obvious reasons. I think when people like Auto Trader, Auto News, when people elsewhere in the car-manufacturing industry are already seeing behavioural change, that gives me confidence that we have advertised this well enough.
A soft landing is usually recommended if you have not done enough pre-publicity. We are doing a huge amount before 23 October, even between now and then. Anybody who uses the Tube will see some of the advertising we are doing there. We are also doing big advertising across the advertising boards across London. I am confident there will be very, very few people who will complain after 23 October, “We did not know about this”. However, the key thing is to make sure in advance of that they know about it and take steps to ameliorate some of the things that will affect them because of the T-Charge being live 23 October.
Leonie Cooper AM: I am really looking forward to seeing that going live, just as I was very pleased to see the last of the low-emission buses coming on to Putney High Street, so it is a legend in its own rather dirty lunchtime. I wondered, can you just give us an update on the impact that we have seen so far since March when the last of the clean buses came on?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just say, on this point, this is a really good example of us in City Hall being able to improve the quality of life of Londoners almost straight away. You will remember in that part of London, in Putney High Street, on I think 750 times in 2016, 600 times in 2015, the nitrogen dioxide (NOx) levels exceeding what the EU recommends on an hourly basis. Since we have started the low-emission bus zone, the good news is it has gone from 750 times in a six-month period to six times. That shows a difference we can make. That is why I am so surprised the Conservatives were against this. I understand why they are against some of our plans to clean up the area in London. However, thank you for your support, and the good news is, particularly bearing in mind who is next door to you, the next bus zone is going to Brixton later on this year, and so residents in Brixton will hopefully see their air improving because of a change of policy from City Hall coming about, because we think air quality is an issue that needs to be addressed.
Leonie Cooper AM: Well, 750 to six really speaks for itself. Thank you very much, Mr Mayor.
2017/4091 - Universal Credit Fiona Twycross AM
What do you anticipate the impact of the rollout of Universal Credit to be in London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Chair. Universal Credit has the potential to improve and simplify work incentives. However, this potential is being squandered. The rollout of Universal Credit has thrown up a number of administrative shortcomings that are causing genuine hardship for claimants, especially when combined with the effects of other welfare reforms such as the benefit cap and the freeze in housing benefit rates for private renters.
We know that Universal Credit claimants must wait six weeks and sometimes even longer to receive their first payment after making a claim. This can push people into extreme poverty, drive up rent arrears, put households at risk of homelessness, and leave claimants reliant on food banks to feed themselves and their children, and having a default process of making payments directly to claimants, Universal Credit is having a damaging effect on landlords’ willingness to let properties to benefit claimants. The Work and Pensions Committee has received evidence that the first three London boroughs to have Universal Credit rolled out in their areas have already amassed £8 million in rent arrears and that more than 2,500 London tenants claiming Universal Credit are so far behind with their rent they are at risk of eviction. There are particular problems around claimants in short-term accommodation such as hostels, refuges and bed and breakfasts (B&B), building up arrears that can make it harder for vulnerable people to get the support they need.
The rollout of Universal Credit also carries dangers for working families. Around 40% of claimants are in work and the new element of in-work conditionality within Universal Credit holds the potential for sanctions to be applied to those in low-paid employment. Frank Field [The Rt Hon Frank Field MP], the Chair of the Work and Pensions Select Committee, has highlighted these, and I quote, “Fundamental flaws in the operation of Universal Credit” and has called for them to be resolved before it is rolled out more widely.
Organisations such as the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) have found that the Universal Credit is failing their clients and pushing many into debt. Jeremy Corbyn [Leader of the Labour Party] raised his concerns at PMQs yesterday and the Prime Minister’s answers frankly showed just how out of touch she has become.
Fiona Twycross AM: Thank you. I thank you for raising the examples from the London boroughs, where we have already seen what devastating effects these policies are going to have. I think the Government has completely missed the point in response to criticism of the Universal Credit proposals because the point is that a safety net should alleviate suffering, not increase it --
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Exactly.
Fiona Twycross AM: -- and that if you have pilots the point is to learn from them. I have heard an instance that a mother was unable to purchase a new school uniform for her child because of the wait to receive Universal Credit, leading her to take out a loan, and there are so many more examples than the devastating cases around evictions because the real danger is that debt, which is already at a ridiculously high level in London and causing huge suffering, will be an unintended consequence of this process and that the main beneficiaries from this system will be high-interest lenders. What help or advice can you give Londoners who are facing real hardships as a result of the Government ignoring the evidence about the flaws with the programme?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you for your question and thank you for raising this issue and your concern over the period I have been the Mayor, raising issues about poverty in London and how we alleviate that. My officers are exploring opportunities to work with boroughs and civil society organisations to ensure the effects of the shortcomings of this policy are fully evidenced and that the Government policy responds to the picture on the ground. I will continue to lobby the Government. I intend to write, as a consequence of your question, and looking at some of the briefing I received, to the Secretary of State to explain the concerns that we have as Londoners about the impact on our neighbours and our friends. It cannot be right.
Fiona Twycross AM: That is very welcome, thank you.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Thank you. Welcome, Assembly Member Eshalomi, back to the Chamber. Can she have an answer, Mr Mayor, on her question re food bank usage?
2017/4052 - Food bank usage Florence Eshalomi AM
Are the Government’s welfare policies resulting in an increase in food bank usage in London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Chair, and welcome back. The latest statistics from the Trussell Trust show that issues relating to benefits are one of the biggest drivers of people using their food banks, an issue raised by Fiona in her last question. In 26% of cases, delays to receiving benefits, an issue particularly linked to the rollout of Universal Credit, are the primary reason for people being referred to a food bank. In a further 17% of cases it is changes to benefit awards that are the primary reason for referral. Analysis of Trussell Trust food bank use in areas where full Universal Credit is rolled out shows that usage is increasing by almost 17%, more than double the national average of 6.6%. The situation is even more serious when you consider that food insecurity is likely to be much higher than indicated by food bank use as many people who may be eligible for support from food banks do not use their services due to the associated stigma.
In a city as prosperous as London, it is not acceptable that people have to rely on food banks to feed themselves. Tomorrow, London Food Link will publish the third annual edition of Beyond the Food Bank, which is a food poverty profile of London. I have supported development of
that report highlighting what London boroughs are doing, including on the London Living Wage, to help improve food security for the most vulnerable residents. Early next year I will publish the new London Food Strategy, which will include a focus on alleviating food poverty. I am working hard to make London more affordable so all Londoners can be confident they can feed themselves and their families by making public transport more affordable through my Hopper fare and TfL fares freeze, which should help Londoners access jobs, education and training, and also my programme for delivering genuinely affordable homes.
Florence Eshalomi AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. I have been spending a lot of time in our wonderful children’s centres in Lambeth and one of the courses they run is back-to-work for some of the mothers. Speaking to some of the staff there, they have noticed an increase in referrals that the children’s centres do to food banks. Obviously in London we are seeing higher costs in terms of a number of people who are accessing food banks are in work. Is there anything that you can do from your office in terms of how we can look at mitigating some of the impact of Londoners who have been dragged into poverty as a direct result of some of the changes to Government’s policies?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The short answer is yes, and one of the reasons why we are doing lots of work, Rosie Boycott [Chair of the London Food Board] and Matthew Ryder [Deputy Mayor for Social Integration, Social Mobility and Community Engagement] have been doing work around the issue of alleviating food poverty with the new London Food Strategy is to see what we can do in City Hall without waiting for powers to be devolved by central Government. The London Food Strategy will be helpful. What we publish tomorrow will provide a good profile so we can monitor a target and resources. You will be aware of the answer I gave to Fiona Twycross [AM] in relation to writing to the Secretary of State. When I do so, I will be pointing to the evidence we have in London in relation to the problems and challenges we have.
The bad news is we have seen a reduction in the number of children’s centres in London and there are pockets of London where we need children’s centres and we need affordable childcare. However, we are not getting that, and therefore it is compounding the insecurity of poverty Londoners are suffering. However, one of the key things that Matthew Ryder is doing, working with other Deputy Mayors and myself, is what we can do to assist those Londoners who are currently struggling because of the consequences of the changes made by Government as well as other facts outside their control, inflation being at almost 3% when wages have been frozen or gone up by just 1%.
Florence Eshalomi AM: You quoted some figures from Trust for London in terms of referrals to food banks. At the Pecan foodbank in Peckham, in my constituency in Southwark, there has been a massive 33% increase of referrals from April to July of this year - and 94% of those referrals are a direct result of changes to benefits. I think sometimes it is a case of a range of people see food banks in London as something that is not an issue and when you have politicians, high-profile politicians, saying food banks are uplifting, what message do you want to send out to politicians and people working in this sector to say this is a real issue in London for a number of people?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): It shows that, not just the current Leader of the Conservative Party, but the future leaders also are out of touch. I think what is clear to me is it should be a source of shame for one of the richest cities in the world to have friends, neighbours and family members, who have to rely upon the charity of family and friends or a food bank. In some parts of London, we have Michelin Star restaurants and food banks and as somebody who has visited my local food banks on a regular basis over the last few years, as I know Leonie Cooper [AM] has as well, it is heart-breaking to see people’s dignity affected this way, it is heart-breaking to see the stigma attached to it. We have to reduce the stigma. We have to give people the confidence to come forward and ask for help. Also, we need to find more ways to signpost people to the help. Some of the churches and the faith communities do a remarkable amount of good in London. There is nothing uplifting about seeing poverty in London or there being a need for food banks.
Florence Eshalomi AM: Just quickly, I know there is a lot of data that we have here at City Hall, but is there any scope for looking at some more assessment and data on the real impact of welfare policies since 2010, because I feel that sometimes we are not capturing everything. There are still a lot of people in London, especially people in some of those more deprived parts of London, who are not even on the radar of any of the number of organisations who are living day in and day out in severe poverty.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): One of the things that we need to recognise is, as bad as the figures are, they do not give us a true scale of how bad things are in London, for the reasons you have said, because many people, because of the stigma, will be too unwilling to go to a food bank and do not want to be referred to a food bank, and rely upon friends and family or skip a meal. In the work Rosie Boycott and Matthew Ryder have done, we have seen during holidays children going hungry because there are not the facilities available. That is why we have done what we have done with the Mayor’s Fund in relation to the Kitchen Social programme. However, I think we all have a role to play.
Florence Eshalomi AM: Thank you.
2017/4001 - Space standards Tom Copley AM
Will you use your planning powers to ensure that no ‘micro homes’ that do not meet space standards are built in London during your mayoralty?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I believe having minimum housing space standards is a vital element of delivering good growth. All new homes should be fit for purpose now and into the future with enough space to ensure they can be flexibly used by a range of residents. As I made clear in my draft Housing Strategy, significantly more homes must be delivered to meet Londoners’ housing needs. This will require high-density development and housing space standards will be crucial to ensuring the quality of this housing. In my new London Plan I will strengthen the policy on housing standards to set out how all self-contained housing should meet minimum space standards. Not having enough living space can have a negative impact on
people’s quality of life, emotionally and physically, and can impact on children’s social and emotional development.
As well as the health and wellbeing benefits of living in a home with enough space, minimum space standards provide many other advantages, homes with enough space are easy to adapt to changing needs and lifestyles and to future living styles and habits. Space standards can also help stabilise the housing market by providing certainty to developers. The standards mean that they know what floor space will be needed and how many homes they can fit on a site and factor this into the price they are prepared to pay for the land. I believe all people really want is to be able to afford a decent and secure place to live, which is what I am committed to delivering.
Tom Copley AM: Thank you for that answer, Mr Mayor. I want to ask you specifically about build-to-rent properties. Your affordability and viability supplementary planning guidance (SPG) allows for flexibility of design for build-to-rent homes. Recently some property developers have been proposing micro homes, some as small as 19 metres squared. That is just a little bigger than two prison cells and about the same size as a student flat. Is that good enough for London?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): No. By the way, as I often do, I saw your tweets in relation to your visit that you made, Tom. Can I just reassure you on this, of course there will be some applications that come to me in my quasi-judicial role, some will not, and that is I think what your concern is that those that do not come to me can be these micro homes. Can I be clear now that my plan will not include any explicit flexibility to support micro homes and give you that reassurance, because obviously your concern is lower down the food chain, I do not say that in a pejorative way, council will give permission because of flexibility. I am quite clear, for the reasons I have said, why these are not give for the sustainability of future Londoners.
Tom Copley AM: That is good to hear and any scheme that did come across your desk as it met the threshold, would you reject an application on the basis of flats that came in at that size?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes, that is why I was quite clear to refer to my quasi-judicial role. I am not going to prejudge an application; however, it is really important to telegraph to developers. What I do not want is developers in the future to say, “Hold on a sec, the only way we can make this scheme viable is by building micro homes”. I have made clear now my expectations in relation to space standards, so do not come complaining about them not being viable if they are not micro homes.
Tom Copley AM: Thank you for that. The developer in question that has been proposing these particular micro homes is claiming that they are going to be let out at London Living Rent. Now, of course it is easier for a developer to say they will offer a lower rent if they slash the size of the property. The London Living Rent is a very welcome policy that is very much associated with yourself because it was your scheme. Would you be concerned about developers putting that label on to micro homes?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): To be fair, you played a big role in us getting there, as to lobbying me to get a London Living Rent. A London Living Rent home should not be substandard. I think what developers are in danger of misreading is what we believe in about having homes that are affordable to rent for Londoners, but then being somehow substandard. No. The expectation from us is to reduce the cost of renting in London but to maintain good quality standards including sufficient space.
Tom Copley AM: Excellent, thank you very much, Mr Mayor.
Andrew Boff AM: Mr Mayor, you frequently referred to unprecedented £3 billion affordable housing funding provided to you by the Government. The Government is now rightly raising concerns about this, how this is being spent, as so far this year you have only built or started only 371 affordable homes. What are you going to do to reverse this failure to use the generous funding that has been provided by the Government?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): No concern has been raised with me, but let me be clear, the time it takes to give permission after you have allocated the money and for construction to begin takes years. I made the point that because of the pipeline being so low, only 13% affordable in the year before I became Mayor, it will take some time for Londoners to see progress. The commitment I made to the Government was by 2021 90,000 starts, we are on course to deliver those.
Andrew Boff AM: In your manifesto, Mr Mayor, you promised an increase in housing every year. Was last year not a year?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The cupboard was bare when I became the Mayor, and 13% of the pipeline --
Andrew Boff AM: Every year, Mr Mayor, you promised to increase homes and last year you built 25% fewer than your predecessor, 25% fewer homes with the correct space standards than your predecessor, 25% fewer.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I think Assembly Member Boff is giving me credit for there being fewer substandard space homes in London than there were before and I accept that credit.
Andrew Boff AM: 25% fewer, Mr Mayor, and yet you promised to build more. Open up to Londoners and tell them why you misled them in your manifesto.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Chair, as I said to the Prime Minister earlier this week --
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): The Conservative Group are out of time, therefore let me move on to the next question.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): That is a shame, Chair.
2017/4064 - London Heritage Strategy Nicky Gavron AM
You said in a City for All Londoners, “I will do everything in my power to protect the city’s heritage”. Can you elaborate on this?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Chair, and thank you for this excellent question. London’s heritage and historic environment are irreplaceable and an essential part of what makes London the vibrant, successful and unique city it is. My new draft London Plan will ensure that the city’s heritage is protected and conserved. Heritage and conservation is not only about listed buildings and conservation areas, but about an approach that prioritises understanding the context of a place and its local community, being sensitive to what is unique about an area, and using this to inform its future development and evolution.
As new developments are designed, the things that Londoners value about a place should be used positively to guide and stimulate growth and create distinctive attractive places that people care about. These principles guide my regeneration funds, including the Good Growth Fund, which has three overarching aims of supporting people, place and prosperity, and promotes community-led regeneration. As you will be aware, there was a UNESCO World Heritage Committee reactive monitoring mission to Westminster World Heritage site this February. I met with the mission officials and set out my strong commitment to conservation and the management of London’s World Heritage sites and London’s heritage in general.
Following this mission, the World Heritage Committee decided not to place Westminster World Heritage site on the World Heritage endangered list and made a number of recommendations, which I am addressing. This includes clearer and stronger policies in the new London Plan to protect London’s World Heritage sites. I have also recruited a Culture at Risk Officer to track cultural places and spaces that are at risk of closure or loss, many of which are part of London’s heritage.
As a result of this and my team’s close working with Historic England, the Kasowski Murals on Old Kent Road were given a grade 2 listing in July this year. I will continue to work with Historic England and the Heritage Lottery Fund to embed heritage across my cultural programme. I have appointed Stuart Hobley, Head of the Heritage Lottery Board, as a cultural ambassador. Stuart will help champion and advocate for heritage through my Culture Strategy and my Cultural Infrastructure Plan. Heritage will also be a part of projects such as the London Borough of Culture, which will celebrate local heritage.
Looking forward, my design advocates and the newly-established London Review Panel will provide greater support to the GLA in assessing the quality of works affecting London’s heritage assets.
Nicky Gavron AM: Thank you. That is packed with new information. Thank you very much for that. It is very clear that you really do understand what heritage means to London and Londoners and to you. I think all over London there are thousands of local landmarks and they
root us and they are part of our stories. We could take the Henry Prince Estate, part of your story, and whether we are looking at those or whether we are looking at big iconic assets like the Tidal Thames and Tower Bridge, they are really important to us. However, we are at a time, and you recognise that, of growth, big churn, big change, and we need very, very strong heritage championship. The current London Plan does not give that. It does not have heritage as part of its strategic objective or vision. It has very weak policies and they are weaker than the NPPF. My question is we cannot let heritage fall by the wayside in the name of growth and how will your new London Plan really strengthen it? Will you take on board some of those points I have made about it being part of the vision and the objectives and also strengthening the policies?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely, and just to compound your --
Nicky Gavron AM: With a very succinct answer, please. I want to ask one more question.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I talk about good growth for a reason, I want good growth, but secondly there is a great [Winston} Churchill saying, which is, “We shape buildings and buildings shape us”. I think it applies to heritage as well.
Nicky Gavron AM: That is a very good answer. Thank you very much. The second thing is that we have weak policies that have led to weak implementation and I was astounded to find that we really have very, very inadequate monitoring, both of London Plan decisions and of local decisions. There is only one key performance indicator, which just looks at the heritage assets that are at risk, and that is about extreme risk. That is about 5%. What we really need now I think are two things, and I really hope that you will consider these: (1) to get better implementation is that your London Plan policies, your new ones - which will be greatly strengthened, from what you say - are then followed up by a Heritage Strategy to help boroughs and stakeholders really understand those policies and implement them properly, and (2) that we have another performance indicator, which looks at the impact of planning decisions on the local historic fabric.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Can I just, on this --
Nicky Gavron AM: This is for consideration.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): I am always willing to listen to ideas from you, Nicky. So, one of the things that is not helping is permitted development (PD). We are losing some great quality buildings, lovely heritage, because of PD, and that is one of the reasons why I am helping councils apply for opt-outs that they can proceed in relation to PD.
One of the things we are trying to do with the Mayor’s design advocates, is cascade down the expertise to boroughs when it comes to design reviews to respect heritage. Public practice, which is an idea about experts going in to help local authorities, is to build up their expertise. We cannot do it, with the best will in the world, from City Hall. We have to build up the expertise of the 32/33 boroughs across London. We are willing to do that. However, we have to make councils understand why it is important. Growth per se is not bad. I think you can
have growth, however, it should be good growth, and that is why heritage is in there and what you talk about is very important.
I will think about your point about key performance indicators (KPI) in relation to implementation and I will speak to Jules Pipe, the Deputy Mayor in charge of this area, to see what we can do. However, this is very important for us, it is who we are.
Nicky Gavron AM: Thank you, and the Heritage Strategy, please.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Yes, definitely.
Nicky Gavron AM: Thank you.
2017/4072 - The Mayor's Design Advocates Navin Shah AM
How will the Mayor's Design Advocates work in tandem with the Mayor's Planning and Regeneration policies to deliver good growth?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Thank you, Chair. I was delighted to welcome my design advocates to City Hall last month and to kick off their important role in helping me to deliver good growth by informing my policies, investments and decisions in the built environment. My design advocates are a pool of world-class built environment experts. They represent both the public and private sector and include practitioners, academics, policymakers and community activists. There are more female design advocates than male and a quarter are from black, Asian and ethnic minority backgrounds. They will be supporting me to deliver my good growth by design programme, which is my plan to improve quality in the built environment and recognise the role of good design in achieving good growth.
The design advocates will be supporting me in three capacities: first they will be acting as critics, providing greater scrutiny of the design quality of development. They will form the core of my newly-established London Review Panel. They will also be signing up to and promoting my London Quality Review Charter, which promotes the consistency and quality of design review across the many local review panels in London.
Secondly, they will be acting as researchers informing design-related policy by undertaking research enquiries. For example, they will be helping to refresh London housing design guidance in light of the need for denser development and the challenges that this poses to quality of space, the needs of families, accessibility, and the impact on the surrounding environment. They will be helping me to develop my plan to make London the world’s first national park city and developing projects for an even greener city. They will be developing the Public London Charter to ensure quality, accessible public spaces, maximising public access and minimising the rules governing new spaces as set out in my London Plan.
Thirdly, my design advocates will be acting as true advocates, they will be celebrating examples of good growth and promoting the sector, while also supporting a greater diversity among its members.
Navin Shah AM: Thank you, Mr Mayor. You have anticipated a couple of supplementary questions. However, on the first one, which you mentioned, which is the early work on the Design Review Charter, can you tell us how far advanced this work is and would you also be able to let us have the terms of reference for the Design Review Charter, please?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): The review is at a very early stage, I’m very happy to give you the terms of reference. I’m also very happy, Navin, for Jules Pipe [Jules Pipe CBE, Deputy Mayor for Planning, Regeneration and Skills], who is in charge of this area, to meet with you and others who have an interest in this area to give you an idea of the various reviews they are undertaking. Not just on the housing design guidance, the charter you refer to, but other works, such as the prefabrication that Nicky Gavron [AM] raised at the last MQT, a really important area - but they are looking at a whole host of issues. I am really happy for Jules Pipe and the team to sit down with you to discuss this.
Navin Shah AM: That is very helpful. One aspect which you have not mentioned, and I am very keen to explore, and that is about the quality in design. I believe that London, both in terms of inequality in terms of design and construction sectors does not fare very well at all. Therefore, are your design advocates being tasked to tackle those inequalities and how would they be doing this?
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): One of the exciting things I think in relation to inequalities in the construction sector is the modern methods of construction and the prefabrication. Nicky Gavron [AM] raised it at the last MQT. The Homes for Londoners Board had a presentation from [Councillor] Peter John [OBE], who is the lead for London Councillors, and I think the Mayor’s design advocates can play an important role here in relation to addressing this area. It is an important area and, particularly bearing in mind Brexit and the consequences of people leaving, the skill sets leaving, we need to address this. Therefore that is one of the things that the Mayor’s design advocates will be looking into as well.
Navin Shah AM: Mr Mayor, there are major challenges in that. I hope the advocates will address it, because when you look at the figures, which are pretty stark, only 14.1% of construction workforce in the UK is female, 11.3% BAME and less than 5% with a declared disability. Surely we can do much, much better than this and I hope that this is taken as one of the priorities by your design advocates to get the right balance.
Sadiq Khan (Mayor of London): Absolutely.
Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): OK, thank you. That is the end of the question and answer session. Can I say thank you, Mayor, for your answers today.