DOCSLIB.ORG

Governance Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Governance Review Supplementary Public Document Pack Resource Allocation Sub (Policy and Resources) Committee Date: FRIDAY, 18 SEPTEMBER 2020 Time: 11.00 am Venue: VIRTUAL MEETING 12. GOVERNANCE REVIEW Report of the Town Clerk. For Decision (Pages 1 - 154) Item received too late for circulation in conjunction with the Agenda. John Barradell Town Clerk and Chief Executive This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 12 Committee: Date: Resource Allocation Sub-Committee 18 September 2020 Policy & Resources Committee 24 September 2020 Subject: Public Governance Review Report of: For Decision Town Clerk Summary In September 2019, the Policy and Resources Committee proposed the undertaking of a comprehensive Governance Review of the City Corporation. This proposal, endorsed by the Court of Common Council, recognised that because of the unique and historic nature of the City Corporation it requires good governance to ensure it functions effectively and to the highest possible standards. The Committee was conscious that some potentially contentious issues needed to be addressed and that some radical changes may need to be considered. It was, therefore, agreed that the review should be undertaken independently and Robert Rodgers, The Lord Lisvane, was appointed to conduct the Review, due to his significant expertise and experience. He was encouraged to take a comprehensive and critical “warts and all” look at the totality of the Corporation’s arrangements, without fear or favour, and he has now submitted his findings (attached at Appendix 1). Lord Lisvane’s independent report is detailed and contains more than 90 specific recommendations, together with wider commentary and analysis. These recommendations are far reaching and wide ranging; it is now for Members to consider how far they are appropriate and which should be taken forward. The recommendations are not all contingent upon each other and thus do not represent a “single package”: Members will have the option to consider which recommendations (and to what extent) are implemented, and timescales for this. It will be important to go through the Review in a structured and methodical way in the coming period, with Members afforded sufficient time to read and consider the content and implications. This paper, therefore, seeks Members’ consideration as to a proposed approach for deliberating and reviewing these proposals, rather than on the specific content of the Governance Review (which will be debated in the coming period). It will also be of the utmost importance to ensure that the process moving forward provides adequately for all Members of the Court to continue to have the opportunity to input and comment on the Review. It should be noted that the Governance Review was also asked to take into consideration, various other reviews into aspects of the Corporation’s activities (such as education, support for the financial and professional services sector, and its internal structures). Page 1 Recommendations It is recommended that:- • Lord Lisvane’s Governance Review report be received; • consideration be given to the next phase of the process, including wider Member consultation, as set out at paragraphs 8-18 of this report, with the Resource Allocation Sub-Committee being asked to go through the report in detail; and, • formal thanks be placed on record to Lord Lisvane for his efforts in conducting the Review. Main Report Background 1. At its meeting on 14 March 2019, the Policy and Resources Committee agreed to a fundamental review (FR) of the allocation of the City of London Corporation’s resources being undertaken. The purpose of the review was to ascertain how resources are currently being allocated against our Corporate Plan priorities and to ensure that:- • spending was being undertaken in accordance with agreed priorities; • the City Corporation’s financial plans were sustainable in the medium term; • action was being taken to mitigate any risks which might be associated with Government’s desire for public bodies to focus on need and its plans to change current funding mechanisms to reflect this; and • the City Corporation remains fit for purpose in the wake of, amongst other things, Government’s forthcoming spending review, fair funding review, reforms to business rate retention and a police formula funding review. 2. The nature of the organisation’s funding and service provision is diverse and good governance is essential to ensure that it is functioning effectively and remains fit for purpose. Supporting its governance structures incurs a significant part of the Corporation’s expenditure. Furthermore, any changes proposed through the Fundamental Review were likely to have implications for governance. Therefore, a number of Members suggested that a review of governance arrangements should be undertaken in parallel with the FR. 3. There was also a range of wider activity underway which played into the same piece, looking at how the City Corporation might improve the efficiency, diversity, and outcomes of its work across various areas. Its support for the competitiveness agenda, of increasing importance in the current context to support the UK’s financial and professional services industries, was also an area where focus could be sharpened and where changes to governance might improve the efficacy of the organisation’s activities. 4. This view was supported by the Policy and Resources Committee, as well as its Resource Allocation Sub-Committee (which had been identified as the “reference Page 2 sub-committee” for considering the Governance Review matters in the first instance). It was noted that it had been almost nine years since the last comprehensive review of the City Corporation’s governance arrangements was undertaken and, since that time, the number of bodies forming part of the decision making structure had increased to approximately 130 committees, sub- committees and working parties, excluding some of the bi-lateral committee meetings. 5. In reaching their conclusion, Members were of the view that radical changes would need to be considered and that hard choices might need to be made. The difficulties associated with undertaking the review internally were acknowledged and it was, therefore, agreed that any review should be undertaken independently. 6. The Town Clerk was asked to look at the possibility of engaging a suitable individual and, following this process, your Committee supported the appointment of The Lord Lisvane KCB DL (Robert Rogers), as an independent person to undertake the review. 7. The evolution of the Fundamental Review, together with other discrete areas of Review (such as the Tomlinson Review into the City’s education provision, or the Fraser Review into the City’s work in support of competitiveness and the financial and professional services sector), have presented additional areas of consideration which result in implications for the Corporation’s governance. Their recommendations have, therefore, been incorporated so far as possible within Lord Lisvane’s Review. Proposal / Timetable 8. Having started work on the Review in 2020 (and, notwithstanding the complications added by the COVID-19 outbreak), Lord Lisvane has now submitted his report for Members’ consideration. 9. As the responsible body for the co-ordination of the City Corporation’s governance, as well as the originators of the Governance Review, the report is now presented to the Policy and Resources Committee for consideration as to how it wishes to take it forward. 10. The report is some 147 pages long and contains more than 90 recommendations. It would, therefore, be impractical to seek to consider the report in a single sitting: quite aside from the question of volume, it is inevitable that there will be various options to explore in some cases, or implications to consider when coming to a view as to the implementation of specific proposals. 11. The various recommendations are, in many cases, not contingent upon each other and it will be for Members to determine which (and to what extent) they wish to accept and implement. There may be some recommendations that could be adopted relatively swiftly, whilst others would either require or benefit from a longer-term implementation. Page 3 12. Members will also need to consider the proposals with reference to the context of the Review. As noted within the Review itself, the City Corporation is a highly complex non-party political organisation, active or involved across a diverse range of areas, and with a considerable role in London-wide government. It would be unreasonable, therefore, to expect that every nuance or implication of particular relationships or activities has been made available to Lord Lisvane within the time period of the Review to date. The expertise of Members and others in these areas will, therefore, be of importance in considering the implementation of proposals. 13. Members will, therefore, need time to absorb and consider the various items and deliberate in a structured and thorough fashion. 14. It is, therefore, suggested that the Resource Allocation Sub-Committee, having previously been identified as the reference sub-committee for the Governance Review, be asked to go through the report over the course of a series of meetings in the first instance and consider whether to accept specific recommendations, as well as their implementation. That Sub-Committee has frequent meetings scheduled over the coming period as follows, which will allow several opportunities for the content to be considered and scrutinised: • Wednesday 7 October • Thursday 22 October • Thursday 5 November • Friday 20 November • Thursday 10 December 15. The Sub-Committee will make recommendations thereon to the Policy and Resources Committee which, in turn, would consider the various recommendations and submit formal proposals to the Court of Common Council. 16. The Governance Review will affect all aspects of the City Corporation’s governance and all Members as a consequence. It is, therefore, imperative that any implementation reflects the view of the Court, and it is likely that all Members will have views on particular elements.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Jane Bigelow Fonds
    WESTERN ARCHIVES FINDING AID FOR Jane Bigelow fonds AFC 153 Preparation of this finding aid was made possible by funding received in 2016-17 through the Young Canada Works at Building Careers in Heritage Program, a component of the Youth Employment Strategy of the Department of Canadian Heritage, Government of Canada, which was administered by the Canadian Council of Archives. Archivist: Camilla Szczesniak Table of Contents ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Biographical Sketch/Administrative History 3 ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Scope
    [Show full text]
  • London and Middlesex in the 1660S Introduction: the Early Modern
    London and Middlesex in the 1660s Introduction: The early modern metropolis first comes into sharp visual focus in the middle of the seventeenth century, for a number of reasons. Most obviously this is the period when Wenceslas Hollar was depicting the capital and its inhabitants, with views of Covent Garden, the Royal Exchange, London women, his great panoramic view from Milbank to Greenwich, and his vignettes of palaces and country-houses in the environs. His oblique birds-eye map- view of Drury Lane and Covent Garden around 1660 offers an extraordinary level of detail of the streetscape and architectural texture of the area, from great mansions to modest cottages, while the map of the burnt city he issued shortly after the Fire of 1666 preserves a record of the medieval street-plan, dotted with churches and public buildings, as well as giving a glimpse of the unburned areas.1 Although the Fire destroyed most of the historic core of London, the need to rebuild the burnt city generated numerous surveys, plans, and written accounts of individual properties, and stimulated the production of a new and large-scale map of the city in 1676.2 Late-seventeenth-century maps of London included more of the spreading suburbs, east and west, while outer Middlesex was covered in rather less detail by county maps such as that of 1667, published by Richard Blome [Fig. 5]. In addition to the visual representations of mid-seventeenth-century London, a wider range of documentary sources for the city and its people becomes available to the historian.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to London Councils
    Our leadership London London needs to build an extra we are a member-led organisation by numbers 800,000 Guide to new homes The Leaders’ Committee is our main decision-making by 2021 to clear its backlog and keep pace body. The committee includes the Leaders of each With a population of more than with its growing population London borough council. Leaders’ Committee sets policy and takes decisions on the latest developments affecting London , London local government. The committee meets at 59½ 8.3million London is the most populous city in Europe London Underground trains carried more than Southwark Street. Meeting dates, agendas and minutes are available at www.londoncouncils.gov/uk/committees 1.17 billion Councils There are passengers Our Executive acts as a forum for more detailed policy in 2012, a new record development and reports to the Leaders’ Committee. 33 local The Executive is made up of 11 members from across the political groups. authorities in London comprised of Between December 2012 and December 2013, 629 wards the Metropolitan Police dealt with just over Our Grants Committee, comprising 33 councillors, and represented by 709,000 one from each of London’s local councils, oversees the London Boroughs Grants Scheme, set up under the 1985 crimes 1,855 elected (all notifiable offences), more than Local Government Act. The grants programme is funded 10 per cent fewer than the previous year and governed by the 32 London boroughs and the City councillors of London. There are more than London’s councils collect around The Transport and Environment Committee (TEC), provides a range of high quality operational services 3,000 schools 4 million such as parking and traffic appeals, the lorry control in London, educating around scheme, the Freedom Pass and Taxicard schemes.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Common Ground with Bexley
    Statement of Common Ground between LB Southwark and LB Bexley November 2019 1 Introduction This Statement of Common Ground (SCG) addresses the strategic matters specific to Southwark and Bexley. This SCG has been prepared by Southwark Council in agreement with the London Borough of Bexley. The purpose of the SCG is to document the cross-boundary matters being addressed and progress in cooperating to address them. This SCG ensures that the requirements set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) have been met. The NPPF states, “Local planning authorities and county councils (in two-tier areas) are under a duty to cooperate with each other, and with other prescribed bodies, on strategic matters that cross administrative boundaries.” Southwark Council engages with other boroughs and the City of London through regular meetings either between officers or elected members with formalised governance arrangements such as the London Councils Leaders’ Committee, Association of London Borough Planning Officers, the Cross River Partnership, and the South East London Duty to Cooperate Group. We also maintain correspondence between planning departments on a variety of issues and projects and organise additional meetings on strategic planning matters when needed. Figure 1: Locations of Southwark and Bexley within Greater London. 2 Strategic Geography London Borough of Southwark Southwark is a densely populated and diverse inner London borough set over almost 30km of land to the south of the River Thames. Home to over 314,000 people, the borough is a patchwork of communities set over 23 diverse wards. Whilst the northern part of the borough already enjoys excellent transport links to the rest of London, the south is due to benefit from the extension of the Bakerloo Line, which will open up areas including the Old Kent Road to new growth.
    [Show full text]
  • London Councils
    London Councils Minutes of the London Councils Leaders’ Committee held on 15 July 2014 Mayor Jules Pipe chaired the meeting Present: BARKING AND DAGENHAM Cllr D. J. Rodwell BARNET Cllr Richard Cornelius BEXLEY Cllr Teresa O’Neill BRENT Cllr M. A. Butt BROMLEY Cllr Stephen Carr CAMDEN Cllr Sarah Hayward CROYDON Cllr Tony Newman EALING Cllr Julian Bell ENFIELD Cllr Doug Taylor GREENWICH Cllr Denise Hyland HACKNEY Mayor Jules Pipe HAMMERSMITH & FULHAM Cllr Stephen Cowan HARINGEY Cllr Claire Kober HARROW Cllr David Perry HAVERING Cllr Roger Ramsey HILLINGDON Cllr Ray Puddifoot MBE HOUNSLOW Cllr Amrit Mann ISLINGTON Cllr Richard Watts KENSINGTON & CHELSEA Cllr Nicholas Paget-Brown KINGSTON Cllr Kevin Davis LAMBETH Cllr Lib Peck LEWISHAM Cllr Alan Smith MERTON Cllr Stephen Alambritis NEWHAM - REDBRIDGE Cllr Jas Athwal RICHMOND UPON THAMES Cllr Lord True SOUTHWARK Cllr Peter John SUTTON Cllr Ruth Dombey TOWER HAMLETS - WALTHAM FOREST Cllr Clyde Loakes WANDSWORTH Cllr Ravi Govindia WESTMINSTER Cllr Melvyn Caplan CITY OF LONDON Mr Mark Boleat LFEPA - CO-PRESIDENT Lord Andrew Adonis Apologies: CO-PRESIDENT Baroness Joan Hanham CO-PRESIDENT Baroness Sally Hamwee LEWISHAM Mayor Sir Steve Bullock HOUNSLOW Cllr Steve Curran NEWHAM Mayor Sir Robin Wales TOWER HAMLETS Mayor Lutfur Rahman WALTHAM FOREST Cllr Chris Robbins WESTMINSTER Cllr Philippa Roe EQUALITIES Cllr Marie Pye Ex officio (under the provisions of Standing Order 2.2) CAPITAL AMBITION Mr Edward Lord JP OBE CC GRANTS Cllr Paul McGlone In attendance: Isabel Dedring, Deputy Mayor Transport, GLA Jeremy Skinner, Head of Strategic Projects and Policy Evaluation, GLA Jeff Jacobs, Head of Paid Service, Executive Director, Communities and Intelligence, GLA Fiona Fletcher-Smith, Executive Director for Development, Enterprise and Environment, GLA Professor Tony Travers, LSE and London Councils officers 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Westminster Abbey
    Westminster Abbey Civic Service attended in Civic State by The Lord Mayor of Westminster Councillor Audrey Lewis and Councillors of the City of Westminster Sunday 6 th July 2014 11.00 am THE CITY OF WESTMINSTER Westminster first achieved the status of a city in 1540 when, for only ten years, it became a bishopric. Its first recorded civic administration dates from 1585, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, when an Act authorised the establishment of a Court of Burgesses ‘for the good government of the City of Westminster’. While Queen Elizabeth I was creating mayors elsewhere in England, she was concerned that a mayor in Westminster might challenge the authority of the monarch in her own capital city, and she therefore appointed instead the High Steward of Westminster Abbey as Chairman of her newly created Court of Burgesses. The first High Steward to chair the new Court of Burgesses was the Queen’s First Minister, William Cecil, Lord Burleigh. The Court of Burgesses was an administrative body which dealt with public health and morality, planning permissions, the prevention and punishment of crime, and the regulation of weights and measures. It comprised twelve Burgesses appointed by the Dean—one for each ward. However, when the London Government Act of 1899 created twenty-eight Metropolitan Borough Councils, each having an elected Mayor, Aldermen, and Councillors, the authority of the Dean and the High Steward in secular affairs ceased. The last High Steward who was also effectively Mayor was Lord Salisbury, who was then also Prime Minister. The Duke of Norfolk was the first Mayor of Westminster.
    [Show full text]
  • Disabled People's Challenge to the Next Mayor of London
    Mayoral and London Assembly Elections 2016 Disabled People’s Challenge to the next Mayor of London The combined asks of Transport for All, Inclusion London and the Alliance for Inclusive Education 1 Contents Inclusion London 4 Introduction 336 Brixton Road London SW9 7AA The Manifesto: www.inclusionlondon.org.uk 020 7237 3181 6 Equality and Independent Living 13 Accessible Transport Transport for All 16 Inclusive Education 336 Brixton Road London SW9 7AA www.transportforall.org.uk 020 7737 2339 Alliance for Inclusive Education 336 Brixton Road London SW9 7AA www.allfie.org.uk 020 7737 6030 2 3 asking all Mayoral candidates to sign up to. It has been put Introduction together by Inclusion London, Transport for All and the Alliance for Inclusive Education in consultation with our members. There are 1.2 million Disabled people in London1, making DPOs, which are organisations fully run and controlled by up over 14% of the population2, yet we remain one of the Disabled people, are uniquely placed to understand the most marginalised and excluded groups in society. barriers that Disabled Londoners face and the solutions to overcome them. Too often politicians and policy-makers overlook our needs and the issues that matter most to us. We welcome the opportunity of the London Elections 2016 to put issues affecting Disabled Londoners firmly on the In the current climate when, for the first time in the history agenda and look forward to working with the next Mayor of social policy, things are getting worse for Disabled and newly elected GLA members to build a city that is people3, it is more important than ever that our voices equal and inclusive for all.
    [Show full text]
  • Notice of Election for Mayor of London and London Assembly
    GREATER LONDON AUTHORITY NOTICE OF ELECTION ELECTION OF MAYOR OF LONDON AND LONDON-WIDE MEMBERS OF THE LONDON ASSEMBLY DATE OF THE POLL 1. In the event of a contest, the date of the poll will be Thursday, 6 May 2021. NOMINATION PAPERS 2. Nomination papers to stand in the elections for the Mayor of London and the 11 London-wide Members (party list and individual) of the London Assembly may be obtained from the office of the Greater London Returning Officer, City Hall, The Queen’s Walk, More London, London SE1 2AA on working days between 9am and 4.30pm. Nomination packs can be downloaded at: https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-candidate/nominations DELIVERY OF NOMINATION PAPERS 3. Completed nomination papers must be delivered in person and hardcopy (not by email) to the Greater London Returning Officer, Committee Room 1, Lower Ground Floor, City Hall, The Queen’s Walk, More London, London SE1 2AA, on any weekday from the date of this notice between 9am and 4.30pm, but by no later than 4pm on Tuesday 30 March 2021. PAYMENT OF DEPOSITS 4. The deposit for each Mayoral candidate is £10,000. The deposit for each party list or individual candidate in the election of London-wide Members is £5,000. Payment should be made by electronic transfer into the GLA Income Account (Royal Bank of Scotland; sort code 16-00-38; account number 00780445). Payment can also be made by cash or bankers draft (banks operating in the UK only). Cleared funds must be received by 4pm on Tuesday 30 March 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • V2 COVID-19 Partner Pack
    PARTNER TOOLKIT COVID-19 SUPPORT FOR BUSINESSES AND EMPLOYERS Supported by the Mayor of London, London Growth Hub has launched a new portal to support London-based businesses and employers to manage and mitigate their exposure to COVID-19 (coronavirus). In this toolkit, you will find all the resources needed to help promote this opportunity to your network: About the Programme Page 2 Business Advisers Page 3 Newsletter Copy Page 4 Email Copy Page 5-6 Twitter Posts Page 7 LinkedIn Posts Page 8 Images & Contacts Page 9 Visit the portal at: growthhub.london/covid-19-coronavirus-support-for-businesses-and-employers/ The London Growth Hub programme is part-funded by the European Regional Development Fund and offered to UK registered SME businesses based in any of the 33 boroughs of London. ABOUT London Growth Hub COVID-19 Portal London Growth Hub has brought together essential resources where we will keep businesses up to date with the latest COVID- 19 developments, support and offer access to all the information they need. What does the portal offer? Access to free one-to-one support from an expert business adviser COVID-19 checklists, factsheets and guides Guidance for businesses and employers Information about financial support and schemes Access to useful webinars and virtual events The latest press releases and news articles A short survey to give feedback and help us, and our partners, understand their needs Accessing the portal The portal is freely accessible for all London businesses and employers at: growthhub.london/covid-19-coronavirus-support-for-businesses-and-employers/ Make the change.
    [Show full text]
  • Sadiq Khan Mayor of London City Hall the Queens Walk London SE1
    Rt Hon Robert Jenrick Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government Fry Building 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Sadiq Khan Tel: 0303 444 3450 Mayor of London Email: [email protected] City Hall The Queens Walk www.gov.uk/mhclg London SE1 2AA. 29 January 2021 Dear Sadiq, London Plan I write further to my letter of 24th December 2020 and in full response to your letter of 21st December 2020 where you sent me your latest Intention to Publish version of your London Plan for my consideration. As you are aware, my officials have been in discussion with your officers on a series of matters since March last year when I first directed you on your emerging London Plan. Intention to Publish Having considered your Intention to Publish version of the plan and the implications of the Supreme Court ruling on the Airports National Policy Statement for your London Plan, I can confirm that I have no further matters to raise with you. However, I would remind you of powers afforded to me under sections 340 and 341 of the GLA Act 1999 (as amended) that allow me to direct you to review or alter your London Plan. Therefore, in order for you to publish the London Plan, in accordance with section 337(8) of the GLA Act 1999, I am formally confirming that the version of the London Plan that you sent to me on 21st December 2020 contains the modifications necessary to conform with all the previously issued directions under section 337 of the GLA Act 1999 (for clarity this includes the Directions issued on both 13th March 2020 and 10th December 2020).
    [Show full text]
  • A Mayor and Assembly for London: 10 Years On
    2 July 2010 A Mayor and Assembly for London: 10 years on Tony Travers and Christine Whitehead A brief history… It is 10 years since the Greater London Authority was created as a metropolitan or regional tier of government for London. There have been five different arrangements of ‘upper tier’ government in the capital since the Metropolitan Board of Works (MBW) was created in 1855 to build infrastructure. The MBW was succeeded by the London County Council (LCC), a powerful authority for the inner part of the contemporary city. Within this area 28 metropolitan boroughs and the City of London delivered ‘local’ services. Two factors were particularly important in influencing the progress of London’s government. First, the physical expansion of the city created demands for provision across a wider area than the City of London’s original and long-evolved ‘square mile’. The Metropolitan Police Service was created by the government in 1829 to meet the law and order requirements of a fast-growing city. The squalor and chaos of the London of the 1850s prompted Parliament to legislate for London’s first-ever metropolitan government, an indirectly-elected entity. Further physical expansion between the end of the 19 th century and 1939 generated a debate about the need for a ‘Greater London’ government 1. The second important factor in determining the kinds of institutions that emerged was the local power and parochialism of both the City of London and the parish-based or ad hoc bodies that developed to deliver services in the absence of a city-wide government.
    [Show full text]
  • London November Tabloid 1
    LondonAutumn/Winter 2015 News Liberal Democrats Keep Britain in join residents to Europe to protect fight third runway London jobs Caroline’s plan for better childcare - Page 2 - - Back Page - - Page 3 - SPECIAL FEATURE Caroline Pidgeon “I will fight cuts to our neighbourhood police” THREAT TO EVERY NEIGHBOURHOOD PCSO AND UP TO 8,000 POLICE OFFICERS p The plans from London’s Conservative Mayor could see every neighbourhood community support officer and 8,000 police officers axed. aroline Pidgeon (left), who is the “PCSOs are the eyes and ears of the offences to PCSOs. These plans would CLiberal Democrat candidate for police on our streets and provide rip the heart out of neighbourhood Mayor and lead Assembly Member, reassurance to Londoners. The Tory policing teams. In a stroke much of the is fighting plans that threaten the Mayor should cut these plans - not cut progress that has been future of neighbourhood policing. our police,” said Caroline. made in making our city The Metropolitan Police have to Save our safer neighbourhood safer will be lost. make large cuts but these Take teams say Lib Dems “With police plans could see over 1000 Police Community Support “The roll out of neighbourhood based officer numbers Action Officers working in policing has made a huge difference to also under threat neighbourhood teams London,” added Caroline. we need to fight to SIGN THE across the capital axed, “There is ample evidence that many protect community and up to 1 in 4 police people, particularly young people, are based policing in PETITION officers lost. more likely to engage with and report London.” - Page 2 - @CarolinePidgeon London News Page 2 londonlibdems.org.uk ü COMMENT No third runway A different kind of Mayor? The race to be Mayor of London has, more often than not, been more of a soap opera than a battle of ideas.
    [Show full text]