VIEWS: 4 PAGES: 150 POSTED ON: 11/6/2012
Subject: Questions to the Mayor Report number: 5 Report to: London Assembly Date: 25/01/06 Report of: Executive Director Of Secretariat Breakdown of Policing Budget Question No: 1 / 2006 Jenny Jones From next year’s MPA budget, can you provide the approximate allocations for 1) counter terrorism and security, 2) safer neighbourhood policing, 3) general territorial policing, 4) serious crimes, 5) road safety and transport policing, 6) public order policing, 7) other (please specify)? A detailed service analysis of the MPS Budget for 2006/07 was included within my Consultation Budget (see Section 2.3 on page 8) which does show budgets for the main business groups within the MPS such as Territorial Policing, Specialist Crime, Special Operations etc. However, a detailed analysis by the headings requested is not possible as many of them are not separately identified within the overall budget. In addition, the costs of support directorates such as Directorate of Information, Resources and Human Resources are shown separately and are not apportioned to operational groups - which, of course, would be needed if the budget were to be allocated across the requested (and similar) headings. The MPS continues to implement and refine its Activity Based Costing. A report entitled "MPS Development of police Activity Based Costing (ABC): 2004-05 results" went to Finance Committee on the 19th January which provides more of the activity analysis requested. A relevant table from that report is shown attached as Appendix A. Spending on Counter Terrorism Question No: 2 / 2006 Jenny Jones How much extra will be spent next year by the GLA Group on counter terrorism and security? How will this be allocated in broad terms? How much of the total will be funded by the government? As at 23 January, unfortunately the Home Office have not yet confirmed the level of Counter Terrorism grant that the MPA/MPS will receive for 2006/07. We have been informed that a new "single pot" for Counter Terrorism is being created from three existing sources but, at that stage, only one element of the new pot has been confirmed. The estimate of £228m included within the draft budget equates to the sum currently being received from the three separate funding sources. In addition, a sum of £187m for the MPS special grant for international/ national/capital city functions has been included elsewhere in the budget. LDA and Aviation Question No: 3 / 2006 Darren Johnson How much has the LDA spent on projects related to the aviation industry in each of the last five financial years? In the context of the disastrous impacts that a third runway would have in terms of climate change emissions, noise, and air quality, is it appropriate for the LDA to be funding a project (The Environmental Technologies Project with Brunel University) ‘which may help overcome one of the barriers to further expansion’? In light of your policies on climate change, will you divert money away from aviation towards more sustainable industries in next year’s budget? Between 2000/01 and 2004/5 the London Development Agency (LDA) spent a total of £5,705,588 on projects related to the aviation industry. This included projects enabling people from the Thames Gateway area to access job opportunities at Stansted Airport and providing high quality Business Support services to mainly BME Micro Businesses in the Heathrow City area. In the year to date the LDA has spent £578,915 on such projects relating to the aviation industry. Any strategy for increasing airport capacity must be environmentally sustainable in the longer term. I believe that the negative environmental consequences outweigh the economic benefits put forward for the expansion of Heathrow. I am therefore opposed to a third runway at the airport. The LDA has not provided any funding to Brunel University or anyone else to provide justification for such a runway. The Environmental Technologies Project that you refer to is a feasibility study with Brunel University on the potential for creating a cluster of environmental technology businesses at Heathrow City looking at issues such as waste treatment and pollution control. It is not related to the airport itself. In order to reduce CO2 emissions from Heathrow airport, one of the largest energy consumers in London, my London Climate Change Agency is working with the BAA on the implementation of cogeneration, trigeneration, renewable energy and low or zero emission ground transport systems which may be delivered through the London Energy Services Company. Spending on Sport Question No: 4 / 2006 Jenny Jones In your 03/04 budget £87,000 was spent on specifically on sport related initiatives, with £67,000 going towards the London Grand Prix Event. Can you detail what money was spent on sport related initiatives in 04/05 and how much money will be allocated for sport related initiatives in your 05/06 and 06/07 budgets, excluding the Olympics? GLA Expenditure for 2004/05 is as follows: £27,200 on sport and social inclusion £10,000 on older people and sport £262,000 on the Kids Swim Free Programme Total: £299,200 Planned GLA expenditure in 2005/06 breaks down as follows: £10,000 on the Mayor’s Community Skating Programme £10,000 on physical exercise and health £20,000 on older people and sport £25,000 on London Youth Games £15,000 on the Big Dance health promotion £7,000 on Bangladeshi Cricket Reception £60,000 on the Grand Prix in London Total: £147,000 Once programme budgets for next year have been confirmed, the allocation for sport will be available but conversations are taking place with the English Cricket Board to develop appropriate events for the touring teams from Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Motorbikes and Climate Change Question No: 5 / 2006 Jenny Jones Are you aware of the research led by Dr Ana-Marja Vasic of the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing & Research which has found that motorcycles emit 16 times the amount of hydrocarbons produced by cars and three times as much carbon monoxide? Will the evidence, that annual hydrocarbon emissions from the average powered two-wheeler in urban traffic are up to 49 times higher than those from the average car, make you reconsider introducing a reduced congestion charge for motorbikes? I have not personally seen the research, we should not assume research undertaken elsewhere can directly translate to London. However, particulate matter (PM) and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) are the emissions considered most damaging to human health. Motorcycles travelling at average London speeds in the Greater London area are very low emitters of these pollutants as a proportion of road transport emissions. It should be remembered that the primary objective of Congestion Charging is to reduce congestion in Central London. As I stated in March 2005 powered two-wheelers do not contribute significantly to congestion and as such they are exempt from the Charge. For this reason I will not be considering removing the exemption for motorbikes. Price Signals and Transport Question No: 6 / 2006 Jenny Jones Are you concerned that an overall decline in the cost of motoring since 1997, combined with price rises for Londoners in rail, tube and bus fares, is sending a strong pricing signal that cars are becoming a cheaper option than public transport? What can be done to reverse, or counter, this pricing signal? Between 2000 and 2004 car use in London has fallen from 44% to 41%. In addition, congestion charging has given a clear signal encouraging reduced car use in the most congested parts of London, and the western extension of congestion charging will further strengthen this. Fares are only one element in the signal that public transport provides to Londoners. Just as important are the ticketing system, where Oyster is a world leader, and the quality of service. Central to the future will be the projects and initiatives set out in TfL’s Business Plan and Investment Programme. These are all geared to improving the quality of public transport in London, fares make a vital contribution to funding this programme. Stratford High Street Question No: 7 / 2006 Jenny Jones What plans does TfL have to improve Stratford High Street for pedestrians and cyclists? Do you agree that the re-development of Stratford in the run-up to the Olympics should include measures to make Stratford more pedestrian-friendly? Newham Council is the highway authority for Stratford High Street and TfL’s jurisdiction is therefore limited. However, TfL would be delighted to work with the Council to seek improvements in provision for pedestrians and cyclists that would not unduly prejudice network operations. To that end TfL’s Walking, Cycling and Accessibility team met with Newham (and neighbouring boroughs) on 31 January. The aim was to determine and agree appropriate walking and cycling enhancements, both in central Stratford and over the wider area, to ensure the delivery of a sustainable Games and legacy. LDA and Building Standards Question No: 8 / 2006 Darren Johnson Following your response to questions 1836/2005, 2031/2005, and 2377/2005, how do you expect the policy in your Energy Strategy for all LDA developments to achieve ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ BREEAM ratings to be evaluated if the LDA does not have a policy of commissioning BREEAM assessments on all of its new developments? I have instructed the LDA to implement the policy of commissioning BREEAM assessments on all of its new developments. Renewable Energy in GLA Buildings Question No: 9 / 2006 Darren Johnson Following your answer to question 2378/2005, as the target in your Energy Strategy for 100% renewable energy in GLA buildings by the end of 2005 appears to have been missed, when do you expect for this target to be met? As you know from my answer to question 2378/2005 all GLA buildings are supplied by green electricity tariffs except the LDA and LFEPA. I will ask the LDA and LFEPA to achieve this target by the end of financial year 2006/07. LDA Exemplary Development Question No: 10 / 2006 Darren Johnson Following your answer to questions 1838/2005 and the LDA’s answer to question 587/2005, when do you expect an LDA exemplary low carbon development to be delivered? This is a high priority, and I have asked my officers to work with the LDA to ensure delivery of an exemplary low carbon development. The LDA has committed to producing a feasibility study into this in 2006/07, and we hope work will then commence as soon after as is practicable. LDA’s Private Investment Commission and Sustainable Design Question No: 11 / 2006 Darren Johnson Following your answer to question 2380/2005 which confirmed that the LDA’s Private Investment Commission has not addressed the issue of sustainable design and construction, what are you doing to take forward proposal 22 of your Energy Strategy (’The Mayor requests the London Development Agency to ensure that its Private Investment Commission examines the delivery of sustainable design and construction, in order to identify the barriers to and opportunities for increasing investment in sustainable design, and identify to high-profile exemplary projects.’)? The London Development Agency (LDA) is working to embed sustainable design and construction principles in all its development activity. Sustainable design and construction is a key consideration on all LDA major development projects including the Olympics and Crystal Palace Park. An internal toolkit has been developed as a means of facilitating this. Over the next few years the toolkit will be implemented on LDA owned sites as the development opportunities arise and the LDA will also be promoting sustainable design and construction with their development partners. In terms of exemplary projects, over the next year the LDA will be identifying work required to take forward a low carbon development and identify potential locations. On behalf of the GLA family the LDA organises quarterly meetings of the “Developer Forum” with a range of private developers, registered social landlords and other stakeholders to discuss key issues of interest among the development community. We have the opportunity at future meetings to take the issue of sustainable design and construction to the table. LDA and Energy Saving Question No: 12 / 2006 Darren Johnson Following your answers to questions 1836/2005, 1838/2005, 2031/2005, 2377/2005, 2378/2005, and 2380/2005, are you concerned that LDA is not complying with the policies in your Energy Strategy on environmental building standards (BREEAM/Ecohomes assessments), green electricity, exemplary zero-carbon developments and investment in sustainable design? Will you commission a review of functional bodies’ compliance with your Energy Strategy? Climate change is obviously becoming an increasingly important priority, and I will ask my officers to prioritise working with the LDA to achieve the policies in the Energy Strategy. I do not propose to commission a review of Functional Bodies’ compliance with the Energy Strategy, although the Assembly Environment Committee may wish to do this. Olympics and Food Question No: 13 / 2006 Jenny Jones Will the procurement strategy for the ODA contracts cover food, given the large amount of food that will be consumed during the construction phase and the environmental impact of that volume of food? The Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) procurement strategy will apply to everything the ODA procures, and as far as possible to supplies and services procured by subcontractors. Research on Olympics Procurement Question No: 14 / 2006 Jenny Jones What studies are being conducted on the most sustainable ways to source energy, water, food, and building materials, and to deal with waste in relation to the Olympics during the construction, Games and legacy phases? Do you agree that such studies are necessary to inform a sustainable procurement process for the Olympics and achieve ambitious sustainability targets? The interim Olympic Delivery Authority is currently developing a set of sustainable development performance standards which will apply to the Olympic Park development, which includes amongst other things; energy, waste, water, and the use of materials, drawing on good practice and undertaking research where appropriate. This work forms part of the development of the ODA’s Sustainable Development Strategy, one of the strategies required to be developed prior to the commencement of development as part of the planning permission. ODA procurement will be in accordance with these standards, when they are agreed. Air Quality and Olympics Construction Question No: 15 / 2006 Jenny Jones What measures will be in place to mitigate the deterioration of air quality likely to result from the Olympics construction and demolition phase? Are you concerned by the recent ‘Olympic Games Impact Study’, which suggested that the air quality impact in the Lower Lea Valley would be ‘very negative’? Environmental considerations have been an important factor in considering the design, construction and operation of the Olympic Park. Environmental impact will be monitored through the development of the park and the delivery of the Games. Dust control and air pollution are two key issues that will be addressed through the Code of Construction Practice – one of 40 strategies that must be submitted to the planning authority before work begins on site. The interim ODA is currently evaluating how it may assure the highest standards of environmental management (including health, safety and environmental controls) during the construction works. To this end, it is actively developing arrangements for pre-qualification, award of contracts and contract monitoring to ensure that, amongst other things, dust and emission control is properly addressed. Best Practice Guidance on reducing emissions of dust and particulates from construction and demolition sites for use by London boroughs and developers, as detailed in a forthcoming GLA/ALG consultation, will be adopted for the Olympic developments. Construction Waste and Olympics Question No: 16 / 2006 Darren Johnson What safeguards are you putting in place to ensure construction waste from the Olympics and Stratford City development is not disposed of on greenbelt land in and around London? Waste is an important consideration in the development of the Olympic Park site. The Olympic Park planning permission states that the development cannot be commenced until a Waste Management Framework (which is to be based on the principles of ‘sustainable resources use’) which forms part of the Sustainable Development Strategy has been approved by the Local Planning Authorities. The interim Olympic Delivery Authority and London Development Agency are currently looking at measures which will reduce the overall amount of waste generated. Where waste is transported off site, it will be disposed of at an appropriate licensed site (where licenses are issued by the Environment Agency). Cycle Barriers at Ravensbury Park Question No: 17 / 2006 Darren Johnson Merton Council has recently installed barriers at either end of Ravensbury Park making it impossible to negotiate by cycle without getting off. Given that this cycle route is marked on the TfL cycle map will you ask TfL officers to intervene to try and resolve the situation and make the route fully accessible to cyclists? I have asked TfL to take up this issue with LB Merton. Biggin Hill Airport Question No: 18 / 2006 Darren Johnson Will you join with MPs, MEPs, Assembly members, councillors, and Bromley residents in welcoming the report ‘The case for the Community’, prepared by Flightpath, the alliance of residents associations opposed to additional development at Biggin Hill Airport? The ‘Case for the Community’ report drafted by Flightpath was a well researched and detailed analysis of the issues raised in the Biggin Hill Masterplan. As I stated in 0712/2005 many of the issues raised in the masterplan document relate to the lease between that landowners, Bromley Council and the operator. This is not a matter for my consideration. Flyposting Question No: 19 / 2006 Darren Johnson Will you ensure TfL work jointly with Islington Council in making full use of their statutory powers to deal with flyposting on the Northern Line ventilation shaft at Pentonville Rd N1/Weston Rise WC1 junction and the Public Carriage Office at 15 Penton Street N1? TfL is developing proposals for cladding to the Northern Line ventilation shaft on the City Road / Goswell Road island as part of a package of streetscape improvements, planned for summer 2006. It is proposed to incorporate murals on the cladding, subject to further discussions with Islington Council and local stakeholders. The cladding will be coated with an anti flyposting treatment. By the end of February, the hoarding adjacent to the Public Carriage Office’s entrance will be removed and replaced with a hoarding to which fly-posters cannot be fixed. TfL recognize the detrimental effect that flyposting can have and has provided anti flyposting treatment on street furniture in a number of areas. However, TfL’s powers under the Highways Act are limited. Local authorities have wider powers and TfL is working closely with them to encourage greater activity in pursuing offenders. Design and Construction Standards Question No: 20 / 2006 Darren Johnson In the response to question number 580/2005 (FBQT 7 December 2005), the LDA highlighted the role of your forthcoming Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) for Sustainable Design and Construction in helping to ensure that new housing in the Thames Gateway meets sustainability criteria. However, while I recognise the importance of sustainable design and construction, the question, asked how the quality of design and construction - which is a substantially wider issue - will be improved and upheld. What mechanisms, therefore, are in place to ensure that the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation and other local planning authorities in the wider Thames Gateway region will insist on high standards of design and construction other than in respect of sustainability criteria? Are you confident that LTGDC has the resources and expertise to insist on these standards even under threat of developer appeal? My London Plan sets good design as central to all its objectives and the need for good design is rooted firmly in the plan's policies. I have policies that set out principles to be followed to achieve high quality design for London and this policy (4B.1) states that these principles should be used in assessing planning applications, drawing up planning frameworks and UDP (now LDD) policies. Policy 4B.2 specifically seeks to promote world-class design and also the involvement of the GLA Architecture and Urbanism Unit (AUU). The AUU are working closely with the Development Corporation and the local authorities to achieve high standards of design and construction on developments across the Gateway. My London Plan policies are also used to assess strategic applications referred to me so I have in place a strong strategic policy framework to support achieving high quality design. There is a general shortage of planning officers across London, the Development Corporation is a new organisation and it is too early to say what effect this will have. Olympics and Draft Procurement Principles Question No: 21 / 2006 Darren Johnson Which London stakeholders have been consulted on the draft procurement principles and strategy being developed for the Olympics? Has London Remade been consulted? I published the procurement principles document in September last year. Since then, it has been sent to a large number of organisations who have expressed interest, including London Remade, some of which have submitted comments. Bird Flu Question No: 22 / 2006 Darren Johnson Can you update us on your plans to deal with the threat of bird flu? Defra has reviewed its overall risk assessment of the threat posed by highly pathogenic Avian Influenza. In light of the recent cases in China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Turkey, Croatia and Romania it concludes that there is a high risk of further global dispersion. It assesses the risk to the UK as increased but still low. The GLA is continuing to work with London Resilience to monitor, assess and respond to the risks posed by current outbreaks in the Far East and elsewhere. To address the risk of the bird flu virus mutating into a form that would result in human-to-human transmission I provided an update to the Assembly on the status of the GLA group pandemic flu response plan on 14 December. The plan is now in the process of being submitted to the functional bodies and MPS for formal ratification. We will provide a copy of the plan to BMAC for noting. The plan complements the business continuity plans - in place in the GLA, the MPS and each of the FBs - that detail how essential services will be maintained in the event of a pandemic. International Day of Homophobia Question No: 23 / 2006 Darren Johnson What plans have you got for City Hall to mark International Day of Homophobia on May 17th? I supported the first International Day Against Homophobia (IDAHO) in May 2005 by issuing a message of support that was distributed widely. My officers are currently exploring options for further involvement this year. I want London to have zero tolerance of homophobic hate crime and support measures to eradicate homophobia including supporting Stonewall’s Education For All campaign to tackle the problem of endemic homophobic bullying in London’s schools through the production of a teaching resource. New Year’s Message Question No: 24 / 2006 Darren Johnson Do you feel that your 45-second New Year’s message playing on a continuous loop for over two hours at Parliament Square enhanced the enjoyment of the crowds gathered to celebrate the New Year? The Screen on Parliament Square is erected to show the hour-long BBC programme between 11.30 and 12.30 which includes live uninterrupted coverage of the London Fireworks. Outside of this time it is used to broadcast safety and travel messages to the public and, this year, a four-minute promotional video from Visit London focussing on our famous visitor attractions. This did not include a message from myself Vauxhall Cross Question No: 25 / 2006 Jenny Jones Can you provide the road casualty figures for Vauxhall Cross in the three years before the current road lay out was put in place, and for the period since the new layout has been operating? Can you give specific figures for cyclists? Are you convinced that the new layout is safer? My Adviser, Mark Watts, has looked into this matter and would be happy to discuss this with you further. Sporting Facilities Question No: 26 / 2006 Jenny Jones As part of your review of the London Plan, will you give clear planning guidance requiring boroughs to allocate land specifically for sporting facilities in areas of deficiency? The London Plan (Policy 3D.5) already makes clear that “the Mayor will work with strategic partners to promote and develop sporting facilities ….. in reviewing UDPs, boroughs should identify sites for a range of sports facilities to meet local, sub regional and wider needs. In considering proposals for sports facilities, boroughs should ensure that: -“a sequential approach is applied” -“sites have good access by public transport, cycling and walking or improved access is planned” -“facilities are accessible to all sections of the community, including disable people” -“new provision is focused on areas with existing deficiencies in facilities” -“the multiple use of facilities is encouraged including those of schools and commercial organisations.” As a pan London policy this provides adequate broad strategic guidance. However, the Statement of Intent for review of the London Plan does indicate that it needs refinement to take account of provision associated with the Olympic and Paralympic games. It is hoped to produce Best Practice Guidance on sports provision which will provide more specific detail on implementation of policy. Sporting Facilities Question No: 27 / 2006 Jenny Jones As part of your review of the London Plan, will you give clear planning guidance requiring boroughs to provide at least one swimming facility per 20,000 residents and at least one athletics facility per 30,000 residents? London Plan policy 3D.5 (see response to MQT 26/2006) provides a broader and more locally sensitive strategic policy direction than the approach you suggest. However, your suggested ‘standards’ based approach will inform preparation of Best Practice Guidance on sports provision. Economic Benefit of Physical Activity Question No: 28 / 2006 Jenny Jones Will you agree to commission work to develop an economic model to demonstrate the benefits to the public purse, through reduced need for health care and increased educational achievement, of people taking regular exercise? Would you then use this model to lobby central government and boroughs to provide more funds for local sports facilities? I would be reluctant to commission any new research in this area because economic modelling has already been undertaken. For example, the Department of Health in Northern Ireland developed a health economics model looking specifically at the cost benefits of physical activity. The model projected substantial direct savings to the NHS as well as associated economic benefits, based on relatively conservative estimates of reductions in disease levels due to increase physical activity. In addition, a report by the Chief Medical Officer has calculated that physical inactivity costs the UK economy £8.2bn every year of which £1.7bn in NHS costs, £5.4bn is the cost of absence from work and £1bn is lost through early mortality. So the economic case for increased physical activity among the general population is well understood. I will look to discuss this issue further in my regular meetings with the DH and London NHS, in particular, how the ‘Delivering Choosing Health’ agenda can engage with the London boroughs and other agencies to increase access to, and take-up of, sports and leisure opportunities in the capital. London Green Lifestyle Show Question No: 29 / 2006 Darren Johnson Why is the London Green Lifestyle Show held last year not being repeated? Last year’s London Green Lifestyle Show was one of a number of events held in London Sustainability Weeks 2005. The Show was successful but did not attract private sector sponsorship, which makes it difficult to sustain. My officers are currently considering other ways to promote the green lifestyle message this year, including supporting some of the many similar local events. Knee Hill Question No: 30 / 2006 Darren Johnson Are you concerned that the extra traffic generated by the proposed Thames Gateway Bridge is going to cause irrevocable environmental damage to the ancient woodlands bordering Knee Hill? Will you give a personal commitment that Transport for London will not fund any proposal to increase capacity at Knee Hill, as this will increase demand for vehicles wanting to travel between the proposed Thames Gateway Bridge and the A2 through what is a residential area? The Environmental Statement (ES), submitted with the Thames Gateway Bridge (TGB) planning application, demonstrates no worsening of air quality or increase in noise at Lesnes Abbey Woods, Bostall Woods and Bostall Heath due to TGB. The widening of Knee Hill is not part of TfL’s proposal for the TGB. The recently updated traffic modelling and revised tolling proposals show that junctions on Knee Hill would operate acceptably with TGB. Winter Warmth Campaign Question No: 31 / 2006 Darren Johnson How much, on average, would a pensioner be expected to pay towards central heating or insulation after all relevant grants have been taken into account? What assistance is provided to older people in applying for grants or dealing with the practicalities of having work done to their homes (e.g. the need to clear lofts before insulation is installed)? All pensioners over 70 are entitled to free loft and cavity wall insulation under the Heatstreets scheme. Pensioners on pension credit can also get free insulation from utility suppliers. Remaining pensioners would have to contribute from £75, depending on circumstances. The Warm Front scheme installs up to £2700 of heating measures (gas) for pensioners. Some boroughs run their own schemes that are more generous. All Londoners can get free and impartial help applying for schemes and grants from their local energy Efficiency Advice Centre. Grant schemes are unlikely to clear lofts. Aldwych Gyratory Question No: 32 / 2006 Jenny Jones Aldwych gyratory is extremely unpleasant for cyclists and pedestrians to cross. In addition it lacks any bus priority measures. Will TfL fund a study and scheme to improve Aldwych for pedestrians, cyclists and buses? The Aldwych Gyratory comprises roads that are in their entirety the responsibility of Westminster City Council. Through the London Bus Priority Network (LBPN), TfL funded in 2003/4 a study of the scope for improvements in the operation of the gyratory. Proposals included provision of a contra-flow bus lane and improvements in streetscape and pedestrian facilities. Opportunities for improvements for cyclists are being addressed in the on-going development of the scheme. The Council has yet to submit a bid for BSP funding but is understood to be developing a business case for a scheme. TfL will consider the scheme on its merit in the context of competing demands for available funds. Cross River Tram Question No: 33 / 2006 Jenny Jones What consideration has been given to the Cross River Tram re-using the old tram tunnels at Aldwych? London Transport Planning did carry out some initial investigations into the idea in the mid 1990s but found the Kingsway tram tunnel to be technically unsuitable for modern light rail vehicles. TfL is promoting an accessible transport scheme and sees no obvious benefit in moving a surface transport scheme underground for a few hundred metres where people can neither see it nor access it easily. Helicopter Pollution Question No: 34 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross How many advertising helicopter flights are taking place in London in a typical month? Will you make representations to the CAA to have them banned? The Civil Aviation Authority does not keep figures on the number of advertising helicopter flights. There is currently one operator authorised, on safety grounds, to carry a large advertising banner. As I have said (MQ1142/2005), I think that helicopter flights solely for advertising should need special permission, with full account taken of environmental impacts. New powers, or a reinterpretation of current understanding of the law, would be needed. I will make representations to the Government to look at the legal position, including the feasibility of an outright ban. Drug Dealing Question No: 35 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross What progress are the police making in tackling drug dealing in Lambeth? I have been informed that the MPS in Lambeth are running an operation entitled ‘No Deal’ which targets drug dealing in and around Brixton Town Centre. ‘No Deal’ is a direct response to local community demands to address drug dealing and associated street crime as well as anti social behavior. The MPS will introduce a positive arrest policy for drug possession, including cannabis, in the Town Centre area. Officers will use charges, cautions, warnings or no further action. Lambeth Council and the CPS support this activity. A public meeting was held at Lambeth Town Hall recently, which gave overwhelming support for this planned activity. Inspector Sean Martell will run the operation. Further information can be obtained from Supt Stuart Low. ‘No Deal’ is ongoing and has been running since 12th December 2005. The most recent figures are as follows: 306 Stop and Searches 172 Stop and Accounts 104 Arrests of which, 49 have been for Possession Class A/ Class C. The MPS are continuing with crack house raids and closures outside of ‘No Deal’ and have to date conducted 78 Crack raids in the Borough. Percentage Increases in Tube Fares Question No: 36 / 2006 John Biggs What are the percentage increases in child weekly, monthly and annual tube season tickets for zones 1-2, Zones 1-3, zones 1-4, zones 1-5 and zones 1-6 and can you justify this? The Table below shows child weekly Travelcard prices in 2005; child weekly prices in 2006; the cost of 10 child Oyster fares in 2006; and the percentage increases in each case. The percentage increases for monthly tickets are as for weeklies. There are no annual child tickets. From this January, child fares on the Tube have generally moved to a consistent, half fare basis. With the introduction of child Oyster fares on the Tube at half the adult rate, the cost of travel to school by the Tube should go down in most cases – as column (6) below shows. Weekly Travelcard Child Oyster fares Percentage changes 2005 2006 One Ten (2) vs (1) (4) vs (1) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) £ £ p £ Zone 1 7.30 11.10 70 7.00 +52 -4 Zone 1-2 8.60 11.10 100 10.00 +29 +16 Zone 1-3 11.50 13.00 100 10.00 +13 -13 Zone 1-4 14.20 15.80 100 10.00 +11 -30 Zone 1-5 15.70 18.90 100 10.00 +20 -36 Zone 1-6 17.20 20.50 100 10.00 +19 -42 Zone 2-3 6.50 7.00 50 5.00 +8 -23 Zone 2-4 8.80 9.20 90 9.00 +5 +2 Zone 2-5 11.00 11.10 90 9.00 +1 -18 Zone 2-6 12.60 13.60 90 9.00 +8 -29 Range of Travel Tickets Question No: 37 / 2006 John Biggs Do you understand that many Londoners are still confused by the range of travel tickets available in London? The bus fare structure is now very simple. I agree that further simplifying travel tickets for the Tube and the trains would have benefits. Emerging sales trends since the January fare changes indicate that more and more users are getting the Oyster message and achieving better value as a result. The continuing refusal of the Train Operators to accept Oyster is adding an unnecessary and unjustified layer of confusion to the ticketing system. I would urge all Londoners to join with me in making it clear to the Train Operators that this is totally unacceptable. Additional Bus Service Question No: 38 / 2006 John Biggs Do you accept that many of my constituents in Tower Hamlets and Newham would like to see a local bus service running alongside the trunk 25 route between Aldgate and Stratford? What prospect is there of such a service being introduced? TfL is aware of this proposal and has reviewed it. TfL found that because running an extra route between Aldgate and Stratford would not create any new links on the network it created very little benefit for the substantial cost of providing a parallel service. TfL believes that overall, route 25 provides sufficient capacity for the existing demand, but is investigating complaints regarding crowding on the route 25 after the evening peak period. HM Customs Question No: 39 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross I understand that HM Revenue and Customs is a law enforcement agency, but that despite this, vehicles carrying out enforcement actions are subject to the congestion charge? Has this situation been reviewed and are you content that it is reasonable to charge such civil service vehicles? HM Customs vehicles, like all Governmental vehicles, are subject to the Congestion Charge. There is an exemption for emergency service vehicles based on DVLA tax categories, however, HM Customs vehicles do not fall into this category. Due to the covert nature of many of their vehicles, HM Customs chose to pay the charge anonymously rather than have a fleet account. Therefore, they are unable to take advantage of the discounted fleet rate. Like all aspects of the Congestion Charge, discounts and exemptions are kept under constant review, and I will ask TfL to look into this specific issue. Southwark Disablement Association Question No: 40 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross Patrick Horan of the Southwark Disablement Association has asked me to ask you the following question on his behalf: “TfL gives a fantastic statistic of buses leaving the garage with a malfunctioning ramp but this is not true, I have had to wait in the rain and cold up to 90 mins for a functioning ramp bus to come along, the buses in question are the 381 and 1, but I understand this is a prevalent problem across the network, I am deeply embarrassed as I campaigned vigorously against the ¿save the Routemaster Campaign¿ and for disabled users to use mainstream buses instead of door 2 door transport. Mr Mayor, when are we going to get a ramp that functions 100% of the time or at least 90%” Mr Horan’s support for our efforts to ensure that all London buses are low-floor and wheelchair accessible is much appreciated. I am pleased that this was achieved on time at the end of 2005. I recognise there are instances where ramps have failed, causing considerable inconvenience to the passengers concerned. The performance of ramps has significantly improved over the past few years, for example a recent audit of wheelchair ramps showed that out of 2,131 buses checked, only 34 had faulty ramps. London Buses has instructed operators that no buses will leave their garage with a defective ramp. However, instances do occur when a ramp fails while in service and this is regrettable. Ramp manufacturers and operators are trying to minimise this situation. London Buses has been in touch with Patrick Horan to apologise for his experiences when using buses and has offered to spend an afternoon travelling around with him to understand his problems. Pedestrian Crossing Facilities - Thurlow Park Road Question No: 41 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross Parents have been contacting me regarding the lack of a pelican crossing on the A205 at the junction of Elmcourt and Lovelace Rd. There is obviously real fear amongst parents regarding the safety of their children crossing the zebra to get to school. When will TfL upgrade this crossing to make it safer? I am aware of local concerns over road safety on the A205, Thurlow Park Road at the zebra crossing located close to Elmcourt Road and Lovelace Road. In my response to Roger Evans (2421/2005) on this subject, I said that interrogation of TfL’s records shows that at the junction of Thurlow Park Road/Lovelace Road there were no pedestrian casualties on the crossing up to the end of the most recent, three year reporting period. It is, however, acknowledged that there has been a more recent pedestrian casualty. TfL, together with its borough partners, has an impressive record of reducing road casualties and will continue to prioritise activities to maximise their effectiveness in casualty reduction. Given the low accident record, conversion of the zebra crossing to a pelican would not suggest a potential for casualty reduction. However, such conversions can be considered also if there is a need to create a better balance between pedestrian and vehicular movement, or to provide a sense of greater security for those wishing to cross. Grounds for providing or upgrading controlled crossings also include community severance. I have asked TfL to ensure that these factors, and particularly the presence of schools, are considered in relation to the crossings on Thurlow Park Road, and that any upgrading of the crossing be appropriately programmed in relation to competing priorities on its constrained resources. TfL advise me that resources to undertake formal assessments have since been allocated, with a view to completing the assessments during the Spring. Pedestrian Crossing in West Norwood Question No: 42 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross I have been in correspondence with TfL about the need for a pedestrian crossing across Norwood Rd (at the York Hill/ Lancaster Ave junction). However as this is a Lambeth Council Rd TfL were unable to act without an approach from Lambeth. Lambeth requested assistance in April and have had their first proposal turned down because it would slow down the movement of buses along the busy bus lane. What assistance can TfL render to Lambeth to ensure that there is both a safe pedestrian crossing at this point - and that buses will not be slowed? TfL reviewed LB Lambeth’s proposals for Norwood Road in the context of the Traffic Management Act 2004, which places a requirement on all highway authorities to ‘keep traffic moving’. The review showed that it was not possible to provide the pedestrian facility without imposing significant delay, particularly on bus passengers. Following this review, TfL worked closely with Lambeth to develop a scheme that would provide the crossing without undue negative impacts for other road users. Lambeth developed and submitted a proposal that included a northbound bus lane that would mitigate the effects of the crossing. TfL agreed in principle to providing funding to allow the bus lane to be introduced. Sadly, Lambeth members resolved ‘to refuse to endorse’ the proposal developed by Lambeth officers. Lambeth has very recently submitted a new proposal which TfL will review. Cross River Tram Question No: 43 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross I am pleased to see the CRT in the TfL five year business plan. When will likely affected local businesses and churches and others in Peckham be contacted regarding the possible relocation issues. The route for CRT through Peckham has not yet been determined, however,. options are currently being identified for detailed consideration. Formal consultation on route options will be undertaken in the autumn this year to allow a single alignment to be selected and safeguarded by the boroughs. The Southwark Unitary Development Plan incorporates a proposed site for a tram depot in Peckham and I am aware of the sensitivities of this site. This proposal was the subject of a public inquiry which finished in July 2005 and the Inspector's report into the inquiry is due shortly. The siting of the depot will depend on the approved version of the Southwark UDP and public consultation on the site proposals. Notwithstanding this, where properties might be affected by any proposed depot site, TfL will work with the borough to listen to views of local people who live or work nearby. TfL is currently seeking to identify potentially affected properties in this area so this engagement can take place. CRT will play a crucial role in supporting regeneration in both Lambeth and Southwark, particularly in areas such as Peckham which are not well served by public transport. Croydon Tramlink Question No: 44 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross I am delighted to see the commitment to pursue the extension of the Croydon Tramlink to Crystal Palace station and park. However, the proposed branch to Streatham is given scant mention. What is the realistic prospect of progress on an A23 arm of Croydon tramlink, and when will this proposal come back on TfL’s agenda? Given the need to prioritise use of its resources, TfL is not able to actively develop the Streatham extension at the present time. However, this extension will be kept under review. Should further funding become available we would be keen to develop it further. Bullsmoor Lane Bus Lane Question No: 45 / 2006 Joanne McCartney Works to the Holmesdale Tunnel on the M25 is likely to cause major traffic disruption to residents in Enfield. Will TfL be willing to suspend the operation of the bus lane in Bullsmoor Lane in order to assist traffic flow? Transport for London and Enfield Council are working together with the Highways Agency to understand the likely impacts of the works to the Holmesdale Tunnel and to consider appropriate mitigation measures. Bullsmoor Lane is the responsibility of Enfield Council as highway authority and any decision to suspend the bus lane would be theirs, but since it is immediately adjacent to the Transport for London Road Network and the Strategic Road Network, TfL would have to approve any such proposal. TfL will look carefully at the relative merits of any proposal Enfield might put forward and work with the Council towards an optimal outcome. In principle, I have to say it would be a disappointment to suspend a bus lane in the face of increasing congestion as it is at such times that bus priority is most needed. Buses are a particularly efficient mode and, unlike the private motorist, bus drivers cannot alter their routes when they encounter traffic queues. Congestion affects bus performance and reliability for passengers throughout the route. Archway Road Fencing Question No: 46 / 2006 Joanne McCartney What is the current situation with regards to your review of the fence along the Archway Road, outside Highgate tube station in Haringey? The review of the fence has been completed as stated in response to MQT 1784/2005 in September 2005. On the basis of a review of all the evidence provided, I consider that in the short to medium term the benefits of retaining the fence in terms of noise reduction outweigh the disbenefits. However, London Underground are working towards finding the best solution for the longer term. Safer Neighbourhood Teams in Enfield Question No: 47 / 2006 Joanne McCartney When can every neighbourhood in Enfield expect to have a safer neighbourhood team? As I announced on January 10 2006, all remaining wards in London will receive their Safer Neighbourhoods (SN) team by the end April 2006 - a full two years ahead of schedule. All of London's 625 neighbourhoods will have live SN teams by 3 April 2006, subject to the budget confirmation in mid-February. All new teams will comprise four officers in the first instance, rising to the full component of 6 PCSOs/police officers by the end of March 2007. Safer Neighbourhood Teams in Haringey Question No: 48 / 2006 Joanne McCartney When can every neighbourhood in Haringey expect to have a safer neighbourhood team? As I announced on January 10 2006, all remaining wards in London will receive their Safer Neighbourhoods (SN) team by the end April 2006 - a full two years ahead of schedule. All of London's 625 neighbourhoods will have live SN teams by 3 April 2006, subject to the budget confirmation in mid-February. All new teams will comprise four officers in the first instance, rising to the full component of 6 PCSOs/police officers by the end of March 2007. Free Bus Travel in Tower Hamlets Question No: 49 / 2006 John Biggs What percentage of 11-15 year olds have applied for free bus travel in Tower Hamlets and are you satisfied that enough has been done to ensure that uptake is on par with the London average? If not, what further steps are going to be taken? Only 14 and 15 year olds need a Child Oyster photocard to get free bus travel. However, younger children do need to apply if they wish to use Oyster pay as you go fares on the Tube or buy a Travelcard season. TfL has now issued nearly 150,000 cards to 14 and 15 year olds – a take up rate of more than 80% across the whole of London. Over 80,000 cards have been issued to younger children. A market research omnibus survey carried out in December indicated that: Over 95% of parents are aware of the free travel concession; Take up shows no variation by social class or ethnicity. Taking the wider 11-15 year old age group as a whole, take up in Tower Hamlets at end 2005 was 35% compared with the 51% for London as a whole. The main factor affecting take up seems to have been the willingness of local schools to get involved in the scheme and distribute leaflets and application forms to pupils. In Tower Hamlets only 10 schools out of 17 participated initially, compared to an overall rate of over 80%. TfL is now working with the Schools’ Co-ordinator in Tower Hamlets, to improve awareness of the scheme amongst parents. Feedback from this initiative and the results of other recent TfL research will determine what further steps are taken in other areas where take up has been comparatively low. Free Bus Travel in Barking and Dagenham Question No: 50 / 2006 John Biggs What percentage of 11-15 year olds have applied for free bus travel in Barking and Dagenham and are you satisfied that enough has been done to ensure that uptake is on par with the London average? If not, what further steps are going to be taken? Please refer to my answer to 49/2006. Free Bus Travel in Newham Question No: 51 / 2006 John Biggs What percentage of 11-15 year olds have applied for free bus travel in Newham and are you satisfied that enough has been done to ensure that uptake is on par with the London average? If not, what further steps are going to be taken? Please refer to my answer to 49/2006. Body Scanners on the Tube Network Question No: 52 / 2006 John Biggs Have clear guidelines been established for the use of body scanners on the tube network? Under whose jurisdiction will this be? The Secretary of State has announced an intention to test security equipment within the rail environment to assist with evaluating whether, and how, it might play a role in the future. A trial is already underway on the Heathrow Express system at Paddington under the jurisdiction of the Department for Transport. However, before any trials commence on LU, clear guidelines for use will be agreed. Oyster Integration Target Question No: 53 / 2006 John Biggs What are your targets for TOC Oyster integration during 2006-7? Assuming TfL assumes control of the Silverlink Metro service, I would expect Oyster Pay As You Go to be accepted on these services in 2007. During 2006-7 I expect all other train operators to accept that their customers want full access to Oyster, including Pay As You Go, and to place orders for equipment that allow this to take place. I also expect one or more train operators to begin trialling Oyster Pay As You Go on routes involving gated stations that already have Oyster readers. It would also be welcome if train operators took steps to install Oyster retail facilities at all rail stations in Greater London. I wish to make clear that I have no intention to pay train operators to do this as it is in their financial interest to adopt Oyster. TfL has already spent millions of pounds providing train operators with card readers at gates, hand-held card readers for train crews and revenue protection staff, Oyster retailing devices that integrate with national rail ticket machines and training and consulting services. TfL continues to share its smart card ticketing expertise freely with the train operators. In 2004 TfL offered to finance the £25 million investment required to allow Oyster to be accepted by the end of 2006 at all rail stations in Greater London. TfL was willing to accept re-payment over five years. The train operators refused and instead are seeking a grant of £60 million or more for a smart card-based system that would solve revenue control problems that have been tolerated for decades. In other words, even though train operators have taken little or no action to tackle fare evasion or provide customers with up-to-date ticketing systems, they hope to pay nothing for systems that will bestow significant financial rewards. Extension of Barking - Gospel Oak Line Question No: 54 / 2006 John Biggs Would you support the idea of extending Barking-Gospel Oak trains to Rainham? As part of the development of its longer-term strategy for London’s National Rail network, TfL has been undertaking a series of studies into future options for a number of routes. These studies include the Gospel Oak to Barking service and its possible extension to Rainham or Grays. I support the idea of service enhancements to meet demand but more work will need to be done on this proposal before any commitment can be given to the development of such services. Wind Turbines Question No: 55 / 2006 John Biggs Which areas of London are appropriate locations for free-standing wind turbines? The London Energy Partnership, which we set up to bring together a range of sectors and organisations across London to deliver energy action effectively, has been working on a Wind and Biomass Study. The study investigates the potential for non-building integrated wind and biomass plants in London, and identifies sites that are suitable for wind turbines. It will produce illustrated GIS maps and a set of guidelines detailing what renders a site suitable for installing a wind turbine in London. The study will be made public later this quarter on the LEP website, at http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/environment/energy/partnership-steering-group/action.jsp Energy Supplies for London Question No: 56 / 2006 John Biggs Given the recent scare over Russian gas supplies what role does your office play in ensuring secure energy supplies for London? UK gas supplies were not affected by the recent problems of supply capacity to Europe from Russia. However, my Energy Strategy recognises the link between addressing climate change and improving security of supply. Maximising energy efficiency and increasing the amount of local, decentralised generation from renewable sources and CHP, reduces carbon emissions as well as improves security of supply. I am implementing this via my Planning Decisions Unit, the London Energy Partnership, London Hydrogen Partnership, London Climate Change Agency and the Functional Bodies. Support for the Co-op and Social Enterprises Question No: 57 / 2006 John Biggs What support has the wider GLA given to a. Co-ops and b. Social enterprises in the past five years? My Economic Development Strategy (EDS) recognises that the Third Sector (including social enterprises and co-operatives) is an important sector of the economy, as an employer and as a partner in delivering the EDS. Over the past five years the London Development Agency (LDA) has delivered substantial support to the Third Sector through funding the London Social Economy Task Force; pan-London business support via Social Enterprise London; dedicated support for enterprises in Objective 2 areas and a major loans scheme for social enterprises. The LDA is also working closely with social enterprise support organisations in taking forward its plans for the future of business support. The Big Brother House and George Galloway Question No: 58 / 2006 John Biggs Would you enter the Big Brother House? Do you agree that George Galloway’s incarceration in the house has fulfilled a useful role for his constituents and if so what was it? No and No. Bird Flu Question No: 59 / 2006 John Biggs How well prepared is London now for any incidence of bird flu? Do plans need to be revisited in the light of recent developments? Defra has reviewed its overall risk assessment of the threat posed by highly pathogenic Avian Influenza. In light of the recent cases in China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Turkey, Croatia and Romania it concludes that there is a high risk of further global dispersion. It assesses the risk to the UK as increased but still low . The GLA is continuing to work with London Resilience to monitor, assess and respond to the risks posed by current outbreaks in the Far East and elsewhere. To address the risk of the bird flu virus mutating into a form that would result in human-to-human transmission I provided an update to the Assembly on the status of the GLA group pandemic flu response plan on 14 December. The plan is now in the process of being submitted to the functional bodies and MPS for formal ratification. We will provide a copy of the plan to BMAC for noting The plan complements the business continuity plans - in place in the GLA, the MPS and each of the FBs - that detail how essential services will be maintained in the event of a pandemic. Loud Music Using Mobile Phones on Buses Question No: 60 / 2006 Valerie Shawcross Are there any measures in place to limit the use of people playing loud music using mobile phones on buses? London Buses have issued a standard reply stating that they do not prohibit people from using mobile phones on buses. However this is a growing antisocial behaviour problem which some of my constituents find extremely unpleasant when using public transport. TfL has run marketing campaigns in the past to encourage passengers to consider the wishes of others when travelling. If a member of the public is unresponsive and continues to disturb others it is difficult for TfL to do more. It is hard to see how TfL could introduce and effectively enforce a ban on people using mobile phones on buses given current social trends. That said, TfL has just launched a radio and poster campaign aimed at under-16s anti-social behaviour. The campaign will remind children of the need to behave responsibly whilst using the bus network, respecting other passengers; otherwise their concession will be removed. Olympics Parking Question No: 61 / 2006 Darren Johnson You commented to the Assembly meeting on 16 November 2005 that you would look at scaling down Olympics car and coach parking in order to find alternatives to building on Hackney Marshes and Fish Island. What progress have you achieved? The design team, working with David Higgins, the interim Olympic Delivery Authority’s chief executive designate, are still working on these issues as part of a wider process of reviewing the Olympic Park plans. Budget Consultation Question No: 62 / 2006 Sally Hamwee Given your comments (on 15th December 2005) that you would not have produced a Consultation Budget unless you were legally required to do so and your view that the consultation paper was “virtually meaningless” ¿ how can Londoners have a meaningful input into the budget process? My comments were about the convoluted nature of the statutory budget process and its timing. The very size of London makes it difficult to engage Londoners directly in the budget process, but as I have said before I do of course listen to Londoners' views throughout the year, whether it is through opinion surveys such as the Annual London Survey or through the meetings and events I host in City Hall and elsewhere. A good example is the feedback from the Annual London Survey on neighbourhood policing. The views of any individuals responding to the budget consultation are also considered. Capping Question No: 63 / 2006 Graham Tope What discussions have you had with government about the capping limit for the GLA Group? Have you been told to work on the basis of a 5.5% increase limit for the GLA? I have had no discussions about the capping limit as the government does not set its capping criteria until after budgets have been set. However, I have received two letters from the Minister for Local Government about council tax next year and I will send you copies if desired. Resilience Question No: 64 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey Further to my question 2132 in December, central government has not agreed to fund the costs of extra resilience capacity for the Fire Service (six fire rescue units) judged essential for the capital city’s safety. What are you doing to ensure that this clear national responsibility does not yet again fall to Londoners to fund? I am committed to fund the enhanced resilience for the Fire Service because I believe strongly, on the advice of the Fire Commissioner, that this investment is needed to respond to incidents such as 7 July last year in London. I am of course disappointed that the government has yet to be persuaded to contribute from national taxation, but will continue to make the case for additional funding. I understand that postponement of half the transitional relief repayment next year was as a result of the direct intervention linking these two issues, for which the Chair of the Authority and I have lobbied. Staff - City Hall Question No: 65 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey Please give figures for the number of staff employed by the GLA (Core) for each year since 2000 - broken down by Department. Directorate September September September September September September 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Chief Executive - 4 32 51 51 3 Communications 19 47.9 - - - - Corporate 56 69 140 172 174 173 Services Finance and - 55 64 69 70 73 Performance Mayor’s Office 26 29 71 84 89 117 Media and - - - - - 57 Marketing Performance and 9 - - - - - Partnerships Policy and - 117.4 102 122 125 131 Partnerships Secretariat 12 71.4 85 93 93 90 Strategy 61 - - - - - Total 183 393.7 494 591 602 644 Consultants Question No: 66 / 2006 Geoff Pope What are the projected costs of consultants in 2006/07 for each of the Functional Bodies? What are latest projected (end of year) costs for each Functional Body in 2005/06? MPA The current forecast for the MPA only for 2005-06 is £148k. Budget for 2006-07 is £150k. LFEPA LFEPA’s projected spend is £3.8m in 2005-06 and the proposed budget is £3.2m for 2006-07. The category of spend is “professional services” and includes areas of spend which can be classified as consultants, or could be classified differently such as outsourced work (e.g. IT projects, scientific services, insurance brokers, computer audit), interim managers, external legal and medical advisers, and building works consultants. These figures may not therefore be directly comparable with those from other functional bodies unless these have also been produced on that basis. TfL The projected cost of consultants in 2006-07 for TfL is £116m. The forecast (end of year) costs of consultants in 2005-06 are expected to be £117m which is slightly above budget. LDA Consultancy figures for 2006-7 are subject to the London Development Agency’s (LDA) corporate planning processes. Consultancy costs for 2005-06 year to-date are £5.7m. Projected consultancy costs to the financial year-end are subject to the appraisal and approval of planned projects for the rest of 2005-06 which has a consultancy component. The LDA has efficiency targets, one of which is to monitor and control the usage of consultants within the LDA. Budget Setting Question No: 67 / 2006 Graham Tope Will you provide details of your meeting with Jenny Jones and Darren Johnson AMs on 10 January 2006 and in particular, detail any agreements made between yourself and the Green Group? I attach a copy of my letter (as Appendix B) to Darren and Jenny which sets out what was agreed at that meeting. The Londoner Newspaper Question No: 68 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey What financial commitments have each of the functional bodies made to fund The Londoner newspaper in 2006/07 (please include each amount)? The LDA has agreed to provide £500,000 of funding for The Londoner in 2006/07. Agreements have not yet been made with other funding partners. Transport Commissioner Question No: 69 / 2006 Geoff Pope Why do we need another Transport Commissioner? To continue to deliver the significant improvements in London’s transport system. TfL Income Question No: 70 / 2006 Geoff Pope Please provide a breakdown of TfL’s latest income projections for 2005/06 (end of year) broken down by fare (each mode) and other income. The breakdown of TfL’s latest income projection for 2005/06 can be found in the Table below. Mode Full Year forecast (Q3) 2005/06 (£m) Underground Income from fares 1,285 Bus Income from fares 941 Congestion Charging Income 229 PCO, VCS Licence fees 35 DLR income from fares 44 Other TfL Income 277 Total 2,811 TfL Income Question No: 71 / 2006 Geoff Pope Please provide a breakdown of TfL’s latest projections for income in 2006/07 broken down by fare (each mode) and other income. The breakdown of TfL’s latest income projection for 2006/07 can be found in the Table below. Mode Projected 2006/07 (£m) Underground Income from fares 1,340 Bus Income from fares 1,004 Congestion Charging Income 219 PCO, VCS Licence fees 37 DLR income from fares 59 Other TfL Income 287 Total 2,946 Bus Fare Income Question No: 72 / 2006 Geoff Pope How much revenue income will ‘off peak’ cash fare income generate in 2006/07 (TfL projection)? Bus cash fare income is expected to be around £150m in 2006/07. About three quarters of cash fares revenue arises from travel outside the peaks defined as weekdays 07:00-09:30 and 16:00-19:00. Cash Payment on Buses Question No: 73 / 2006 Geoff Pope What percentage of buses users currently pay by cash? What is TfL’s current thinking about when buses will be cashless? In the four week period to 10 December 2005, 7.7% of passengers paid cash on the bus, down from 10.2% in the four week period leading up to 17 September 2005. Early evidence suggests a further decline in cash payments following the January 2006 fares change. There are several benefits in passengers paying for their bus travel in advance, including: reduced boarding times shorter journey times avoiding cash handling; reducing the possibility of assaults bus contract cost savings A ‘cashless’ bus network therefore remains an aspiration for TfL, though the current view is to move towards its introduction no earlier than April 2007 as its introduction would be carefully managed, with close engagement with stakeholders to ensure its success. Advertising Revenue on the Tube Question No: 74 / 2006 Geoff Pope What advertising revenue did London Underground derive in the financial year 2004/05 from the Northern and Piccadilly Lines? If possible, please provide a breakdown between revenue from advertising on trains and at stations, and an indication of an average revenue from a single station. It is not possible to calculate a figure that reflects a single station. LU currently earns approximately £35m per year from advertising. Under the existing advertising contract LU receives an overall amount of revenue in accordance with the base square metreage offered for sale as commercial advertising. As the bulk of advertising space is on stations this accounts for the majority of the revenue derived. The Londoner Question No: 75 / 2006 Sally Hamwee Why was the Dartford Express of January 4th distributed with a copy of The Londoner newspaper inside it? As that newspaper is distributed entirely outside the Greater London area how much did this insertion cost; and why was the Londoner distributed in this area? The Dartford Express is distributed both inside and outside Greater London. The GLA’s distribution package uses the Dartford Express in the following postal sectors: Postal sector Ward Quantity BR8 7 Cray Valley East Ward 5989 BR8 8 Cray Valley East Ward 2665 DA1 3 Crayford Ward 3654 DA5 2 St Mary's Ward 1562 Postal sector boundaries do not correspond with the Greater London boundary. In cases where postal sectors fall across the boundaries of the Greater London area the person delivering may have a round that includes a small number of households over the boundary. There is no way of splitting small delivery rounds and so in such cases some overlap (one or two streets) is unavoidable. The cost of delivering to 100 houses outside the Greater London boundary is £3.19. The total cost for distributing with The Dartford Express in the above postal sectors was £13,870. GLA Advertising Question No: 76 / 2006 Sally Hamwee How much has the GLA spent in advertising this year in publications whose distribution is substantially outside the GLA boundaries? GLA advertising consists of marketing campaigns, legislative and procurement advertising. The GLA has spent £31,362 on advertising in publications with reach outside of the GLA’s boundaries. This represents 2% of our total media spend. Christmas Cards Question No: 77 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey How many Christmas cards did you send out through the post and what was the cost? I sent out a total of 3,797 cards. The cost of posting these cards was £808, compared to the London Assembly party groups who ordered a total of 9,450 cards, costing the GLA an estimated £2,740 to post. Precept Increase Question No: 78 / 2006 Sally Hamwee Has the inflation in the cost of a Walnut Whip increased in line with your precept? I have only increased the precept in line with what I think is a reasonable cost to the council tax payer for the investment in vital public services that I have delivered. There is no reason why this should have increased at the same rate as a mass-produced confectionery product. Lesbian and Gay Museum Question No: 79 / 2006 Sally Hamwee What financial support has the GLA given to the Lesbian and Gay Museum project to date? Why has £24,000 been returned to the GLA General Fund Reserve? What is the current status of the project? The GLA has not provided direct financial support to the Lesbian & Gay Museum. Money was earmarked for an independent feasibility report. It was agreed with the organisers via meetings with them, that this research was not needed as they had already carried out most of this work. Therefore the GLA feasibility study was not commissioned. The budget allocated was therefore not required. The project is being progressed by an independent charitable trust with my support. Childcare Affordability Programme (CAP) Question No: 80 / 2006 Dee Doocey Please can you separate the figures you provided last month to show the number of flexible, and the number of full daycare places, by borough, of the 3,170 childcare places funded in the first phase of round 1? Affordable Full Day care and Affordable Flexible Child care pilots, Round 1 Number Full Day Total Full and Flexible Borough of care Flexible places Childcare places providers places being offered Barking & Dagenham 9 0 88 88 Bexley 4 0 148 148 Brent 21 70 456 526 Bromley 11 50 113 163 Camden 2 9 12 21 Ealing 12 114 114 228 Enfield 6 24 64 88 Greenwich 17 82 71 153 Hackney* 11 21 240 261 Hammersmith 7 82 16 98 Harrow 5 30 35 65 Hillingdon 9 60 89 149 Hounslow 2 10 15 25 Islington* 9 43 52 95 Kensington 1 8 0 8 Kingston 6 27 25 52 Lambeth 17 156 224 380 Lewisham 4 44 5 49 Newham 3 0 21 21 Redbridge 3 11 42 53 Richmond 7 32 4 36 Southwark 11 50 37 87 Tower Hamlets 10 113 136 249 Waltham Forest 4 0 75 75 Wandsworth 8 15 18 33 Westminster 3 13 6 19 Total 202* 1 064 2 106 3 170 * 201 actual providers in total as a single provider falls within two boroughs Life Sciences Question No: 81 / 2006 Dee Doocey Given that there are “supply shortages in the life sciences sector, which is prioritised for support in my Economic Development Strategy” (MQT 1753/2005), can you explain why the Life Sciences budget for 2006/7 is being cut by over 50%? Through the corporate planning process the London Development Agency has reviewed all resource allocation fairly and objectively. Life sciences continue to be an ongoing priority sector for London’s economic development. However, as with all projects, the financial burden of meeting all the priorities within one sector and in one financial year must be balanced and evaluated against all other economic priorities in London. Any considerable reductions in any given financial year are mitigated by conventional investment phasing over a three year term. Turner Street and Varden Street Question No: 82 / 2006 Dee Doocey Can you provide an update on the proposal to develop a bioscience business innovation centre in partnership with Queen Mary University of London (QMUL) on this site? The London Development Agency (LDA) has acquired the site at Turner Street and Varden Street and is committed to working with Queen Mary University in order to create a bioscience business centre in Whitechapel, which could create 200 jobs and give the area a much-needed economic boost. There are a number of planning and development constraints relating to this particular site. However, the LDA is committed to creating such a facility in Whitechapel. LDA Performance on Housing Units Question No: 83 / 2006 Dee Doocey At the end of September 2005, the LDA had only facilitated 183 housing units compared to the annual target of 1,500. Why is the LDA underperforming against this target? The low number of housing units facilitated is clearly a concern at the half year point. However, it must be considered that completed units are unlikely to conform to a timeline that achieves 25% of the target at the end of each quarter. The London Development Agency (LDA) has advised me that the reporting process for Quarter 3 actual completions has still to be finalised but is indicating an increase exceeding the Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 total, with the large proportion of forecast completions anticipated for Quarter 4. I am therefore confident that the LDA will reach the annual target of 1,500 housing units. Childcare Question No: 84 / 2006 Dee Doocey Are you still planning to meet the target of providing 2,350 new childcare places as specified in the LDA output targets for 2005/6? The output target is made up of 2,000 childcare supported places and 350 new childcare spaces. As of January 2006, 3,170 childcare places have been supported through the Childcare Affordability Programme and the London Development Agency expect to meet the target of creating an additional 350 new spaces by the end of March 2006, therefore well exceeding the output of 2,350 in total. London Offices in China Question No: 85 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey You have confirmed that the activities of London’s offices in Beijing and Shanghai will include ‘civic leadership and policy exchange’. Please detail what role you envisage the offices playing in promoting fundamental human rights in China, which continues to suppress political dissent and freedom of expression. The population of China is experiencing not only rapid economic growth but rapidly growing living standards both of which have major consequences for the world economy. London must aim to engage with these. These developments will inevitably increase demands for democratic expression. I believe that the best approach is to engage positively with the Chinese government at municipal and national levels, and to provide constructive advice and support when the latter is sought. My offices in China will carry out objectives aimed at realising these objectives, promoting exchange of ideas and experience to help both sides in their civic leadership and service delivery roles. London Offices in China Question No: 86 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey Please list the organisations that have been or will be consulted in the development of civic leadership programmes to be led by London’s offices in China. What will these programmes involve? Work is making satisfactory progress towards opening offices in both Beijing and Shanghai and these have aroused significant interest for promoting ties between London and China. However given that staff are still being recruited and neither office is open it is too early to say their precise activities or which London stakeholders will be involved in this activity. Visit to China Question No: 87 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey What steps will you take to highlight the serious and widespread human rights violations that are ongoing in China, during your planned April visit to open the London offices in Beijing and Shanghai? Rapidly rising living standards in China are of course a welcome contribution to elimination of poverty and improvement of human rights, and will lead to increasing demands for democratic reform, while I have also made clear that an entirely unacceptable situation exists in various fields. As I have said before, I believe that the best approach is to engage positively with the Chinese government at municipal and national levels, and to provide constructive advice and support when the latter is sought. It is of the greatest importance to the prosperity of London to engage with the Chinese economy. I shall express all these views during my visit to China as have the prime minister and all other official visitors. London Offices in China Question No: 88 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey How will the new London Offices in China work with other UK representative offices, in particular the Corporation of London’s already established resource there? My Office are very aware of the need to present a unified presence in China both for London and the UK. We have worked closely with UK Government both in London and through the Embassy in Beijing and we are also working with colleagues in other regional development agencies to avoid duplication of effort and resources. The team in London comprises all of the key agencies in London with an interest in promoting the city as a location in which to invest, visit or study. The Corporation of London will be actively promoting the strength of London's financial and business services sector in China and we look forward to working closely with them in the future. Driver Announcements on London Underground Question No: 89 / 2006 Geoff Pope Customer Satisfaction with driver announcements on the tube is down. Has TfL done any work to examine why satisfaction is down and what action is being taken to address this problem? The Customer Satisfaction Surveys (CSS) showed a very slight decrease in the last quarter (July-September 05) compared to the previous quarter (April –June 05) and early indications show that for the current quarter (October - December 05) the CSS scores have returned to the levels previously recorded. It is inevitable that over a period of time slight changes to scores do occur, but London Underground (LU) would not consider these to be a trend unless they occur over two consecutive quarters, or if there is an exceptional increase or decrease from the previous quarter. I will keep watching to see of there is an indication that there is a trend. Oyster Pre-pay Question No: 90 / 2006 Geoff Pope The latest performance monitoring figures show that only 3% on passengers use Oyster Pre-Pay. Are you disappointed at the low take-up despite advertising campaigns? What is the projected uptake of Oyster for 2006/07? Oyster take-up figures are not disappointing. The overall percentage figures need to be seen in the context of very popular Travelcard and Bus Pass products; and the Freedom Pass. By the end of November 2005, Oyster fares comprised around 8% of all journeys on the Tube; and 3% on buses. By mid January, these take-up figures appear to be approaching 12% on the Tube; and 5% on buses. By the end of 2006/07, TfL expect Oyster fares to account for around 25% of journeys on the Tube and 10% on buses. * Oyster Pre-pay Question No: 91 / 2006 Geoff Pope While there has been a welcome increase in the take-up of Oystercard Pre-Pay following the introduction of TfL’s new fare structure, there is still a long way to go before a majority of passengers use Pre-Pay as only 3% have taken it up. Can you confirm that Pre-Pay will be re-branded as ‘Pay As You Go’? What plans are there for a promotional campaign that will enable passengers to grasp the concept and understand the benefits? Yes, Pre-Pay has been re-branded as pay as you go. All new communication will reflect this and all current information is being updated. The benefits of Oyster have been regularly communicated via advertising and customer information, e.g. the Guide to Oyster. Throughout 2006, the benefits of Oyster will be heavily promoted. Oyster Pre-pay and TOCs Question No: 92 / 2006 Graham Tope Will you seek legal powers under new legislation to compel train operating companies to accept Pre-Pay Oystercard at their stations within Greater London? No. The Department for Transport already has powers to compel train operators to make investments. See also the answer to question 53/2006. Customer Charter Refunds Question No: 93 / 2006 Geoff Pope Please state how many Customer Charter Refunds London Underground have processed each month during 2005. What is the cost of providing these refunds in terms of staffing and revenue loss? During 2005 London Underground has processed 543,535 Customer Charter claims totalling £1,677,263.20. Month Number of claims Value of claims January 59,977 £186,765.00 February 44,705 £140,460.70 March 57,033 £175,875.50 April 36,466 £112,629.20 May 47,573 £145,984.90 June 53,695 £168,034.20 July 35,415 £114,700.60 August 43,745 £138,313.40 September 40,408 £122,985.00 October 53,903 £158,762.70 November 52,223 £155,437.30 The cost of administering the Customer Charter Refunds System is approximately £400,000 per annum. This can vary depending on the volume of refunds. Plans to expand and improve web functionality and associated systems will reduce the administration costs going forward. Extension to Bus Route 72 Question No: 94 / 2006 Geoff Pope Please explain why a serious and well prepared proposal to extend the 72 bus route to Kingston Hospital was dismissed out of hand in contemptuous terms by a TfL spokesperson in the local newspaper. Is this how London Buses intends in future to respond to proposals made by local communities and elected representatives? TfL do not agree that the proposal was rejected out of hand or ‘in contemptuous terms’. TfL considered the request very carefully, but could not progress it because the additional journeys and benefits provided would not justify the considerable extra cost and resources needed to extend the route. The bus network cannot provide a direct link for every destination in London. This link is already possible with one change of bus, from route 72 to route 85. The frequency and reliability of both services have improved in recent years. In addition, a new entrance to Kingston Hospital will create a more direct and level route from the bus stop. Proposals from the public are carefully considered, and always will be. TfL will continue to make changes to the network that are necessary to accommodate changing demand, and represent value for money. The success of TfL’s approach is reflected in the fact that patronage has increased by almost 40% since 1999/2000. Winter Warmth Campaign Question No: 95 / 2006 Geoff Pope How will the Winter Warmth Campaign target those Londoners most in need of advice and help? Is the pack simply sent to all Londoners over a certain age? How will the project be evaluated? This campaign was sponsored by British Gas and Help the Aged. The pack was sent out to every pensioner over the age of 65, as all older people are vulnerable to the cold. This mailing is being supported with a specialist programme of communications targeting older people from ethnic minorities. The project will be evaluated via a telephone survey, calls to the 0845 number and visits to the Help the Aged web site. Extension of 549 Bus Route Question No: 96 / 2006 Graham Tope A petition from the community in South Woodford indicates considerable support for extending the 549 route from South Woodford to Whipps Cross Hospital. Is there any chance that London Buses will consider this proposal seriously? TfL considers carefully all proposals for changes to the bus network and progresses those that are cost effective and necessary to accommodate changing levels of passenger demand or new travel habits. The possibility of extending route 549 was investigated. TfL found that too few additional journeys would be made to justify the extra resources that would be necessary to extend the route. South Woodford residents can access the hospital by interchanging from route 549 to the W12, which directly serves the hospital grounds. Buses to Hospitals Question No: 97 / 2006 Geoff Pope Moves within the NHS to close local hospitals and concentrate facilities in hospitals far distant from local communities mean that it is important for London Buses to review bus services so that patients and visitors can travel these longer distances at times which fit with hospital appointments and visiting schedules. Will you ensure that London Buses accepts this challenge and comes forward with solutions? I agree that this is an important issue, London buses are addressing it. TfL has invested significantly in bus service provision to meet local needs for new and, in many cases, longer distance trips to access hospital facilities on new sites. Often such changes benefit the health authority, as they rationalise and reduce sites and dispose of them, but can result in inconvenience for patients, visitors and employees and additional costs to TfL as the new facilities are poorly sited in terms of assess by public transport and other sustainable modes. TfL works closely with Hospital Trusts and other health bodies to understand changes in hospital provision and to develop the bus network in a way that takes account of such changes. This work will continue. Tiger’s Head Junction Question No: 98 / 2006 Graham Tope Can you confirm that as a part of TfL Street Management’s plan to improve the A20 Bromley Road junction with Southend/Whitefoot Lane, two new green man crossings will be added to this junction? Yes. The design for the scheme to improve pedestrian facilities at this junction is complete. The scheme would provide controlled (green man) pedestrian crossings on all arms of the junction, but requires a strip of land owned by Lewisham Council to be taken into the highway. TfL and Lewisham are in the process of negotiating terms for the transfer of this land. TfL will make every effort to reach a swift conclusion to these negotiations. Once this matter is finalised the scheme is then ready to move forward to construction. Silverlink Metro Franchise Question No: 99 / 2006 Geoff Pope Please can you give an update on how TfL Rail’s negotiations with the Department for Transport are going over the plan for TfL to assume responsibility for the Silverlink Metro rail franchise ¿ were these not to have been concluded during last Autumn? What, if any, are the sticking points? TfL are in the process of concluding negotiations with the DfT on the terms of responsibility for the Silverlink Metro franchise. There have been detailed financial negotiations to ensure that the terms of transfer are in the interests of London and will not result in an unfair cost burden. I am confident that these negotiations will be concluded in the very near future. TfL will then put in place arrangements to let a concession which will take over from the present franchisee. This is planned to take place in 2007. Thameslink Box Question No: 100 / 2006 Graham Tope It appears that the Department for Transport are still dithering about committing the necessary funding to fit out the “Thameslink Box” as a functioning station alongside the Eurostar terminal at St Pancras Station. This threatens to compromise the launch of St Pancras in 2007. What further pressure are you able to bring to bear on the Secretary of State to announce that this very necessary work will be funded? TfL continue to work with DfT to enable earlier completion of the Thameslink ‘box’. They have also been progressing arrangements at King’s Cross LUL to enable the new station to be brought into service as soon as possible. London Underground Managers Question No: 101 / 2006 Geoff Pope Your Answer to my Question 2346/2005 indicated that London Underground are employing some 602 Managers on salaries of up to £57.010. London Buses appears to have 65 staff on equivalent salaries within their Management Teams. Please account for this disparity and provide a breakdown of the functions of the 602 LU Managers. The total number of staff employed by London Underground is 13,185. Of this, 10,856 are employed as staff and managers in operations. Besides the running of the operational railway London Underground has ten Directorates. The breakdown of the 602 LU Managers by Directorate is: Operations 73 Chief Programmes Office 129 Engineering 34 Safety, Quality & Environment 44 Employee Relations 6 Human Resources 10 Finance 35 Legal 16 Strategy & Service Development 120 Operational Support 105 Information Management 30 The disparity between the number of Managers employed by London Underground and London Buses is due to the difference in size and structure of both organisations. London Underground retains staff for day to day operations whereas London Buses contract out these services. Future of Congestion Charging Question No: 102 / 2006 Geoff Pope If TfL’s current ‘tag and beacon’ trials are successful, and you are able to introduce road pricing in Greater London using that technology, will the current congestion zones be discontinued ? How far ahead do you estimate such developments might be? The current trials are to test the technology in the London context. Assuming they prove successful, any consideration to take a scheme forward would need to be in the context of the Government initiative to consider the feasibility of a national distance-based road pricing scheme, potentially using satellite technology. However Government do not expect to implement a national scheme till after 2015. TfL are considering options for use of tag and beacon for the current congestion charging scheme. This would still be based on payment when passing a fixed point, rather than on distance travelled. Tag and beacon for the current charging scheme could not be introduced before the re-let of the service provider contract, which is planned for 2009/10. Bus Countdown at Sutton Question No: 103 / 2006 Graham Tope At the November MQT, I asked about a bus countdown at a bus stop in Sutton, which has been out of action for a number of months. The problem is not going to be resolved until the end of this month. Why does it take so long for such problems to be identified, and what is being done to speed up the process? TfL apologises for the delay in resolving the problems with this Countdown sign. TfL’s policy is to remove any faulty signs that cannot be repaired within ninety days. However, in this case there were three consecutive faults: two cases of vandalism and a further problem as a result of resurfacing work on the footway. This led to the much longer timescales in this case. TfL has reviewed the procedures and is implementing steps to ensure stricter adherence in future. Bus Countdowns Question No: 104 / 2006 Graham Tope How frequently are bus countdowns checked to ensure that they are in good working order? TfL aims to check every Countdown sign on site every four weeks through a mobile patrol. In addition, there are ad-hoc checks by Sign Engineers and other staff. TfL also remotely monitor those Countdown signs fitted with digital cabling to allow faults to be detected without the need for a site visit. If you know of any faulty signs, please let London Buses Customer Services know (via 0845 300 7000). Benefits of the Electric Trolley Bus Question No: 105 / 2006 Geoff Pope Now that new electric trolley buses are being successfully introduced in international cities such as Rome and Lyon accommodating up to 200 passengers, and given that implementation is less disruptive, quicker and much cheaper than the tram, and that electric trolley bus manoeuvrability offers more route and bus stop design flexibility and is much quieter than the tram, will you reassess this option for the Uxbridge Road project? TfL commenced development of the West London Tram as a result of a multi-modal study into buses, trolleybuses and trams conducted in 2000. This study concluded that a tram system was the best option when evaluated against the Multi Criteria Assessment Framework (MCAF). Further work has indicated that the tram’s greater capacity over trolleybuses means it provides the more efficient solution to meeting predicted demand on the congested Uxbridge Road. It should be noted that both Lyon and Rome have modern tram systems as well on the routes where this mode is called for. As part of TfL’s application documentation, it will set out how the Tram solution compares against alternatives schemes such as a trolleybus. Integration of Maintenance on LU and Network Rail Question No: 106 / 2006 Geoff Pope Will you direct TfL to enter into talks with Network Rail to ensure that there are no concurrent line closures on overground rail and London Underground in the same part of London? Around Richmond throughout the weekend of 14/15 Jan there was no South West Trains service between Barnes, Richmond, Twickenham and Teddington, no tube service on the District Line between Hammersmith and Richmond and Acton Town, and no easy way of confirming that the North London Line was not operating between Acton and Richmond? TfL and London Underground (LU) are in regular contact with Network Rail to co-ordinate the closures programme. LU provides quarterly Tube closure information looking ahead up to 3 years. LU also meets quarterly to protect areas where customers will rely on Train Operating Companies to provide alternative routes during LU closures. On the weekend in question, the North London line (Silverlink Metro) did provide a shuttle service between Richmond and Acton Central enabling Richmond customers to connect with our rail replacement buses at Gunnersbury and then onward Tube connections at Hammersmith and Acton Town. It is unfortunate that a closure on South West Trains also affected services from Richmond – LU had requested at a planning meeting that Network Rail protect the Richmond to Waterloo route, but this did not happen. Camden Town Tube Station Question No: 107 / 2006 Geoff Pope What is the progress on potential redevelopment plans at Camden Town tube station and what representations are being made to ensure that improved station capacity and access arrangements are implemented including opening a new entrance nearer to Camden Road station? While the Secretaries of State did not grant London Underground (LU) a TWA order to redevelop Camden Town tube station, they did accept that the transport case for a station redevelopment was made. LU, in discussion with the London Borough of Camden, has indicated that it wishes to resubmit a planning application for a redeveloped station. In response, the Borough is preparing a planning brief for the site. Once this planning brief has been prepared, LU intends to commission a revised design for the station and above station buildings. While the original design for the station was being developed, LU also examined the case for a link to the Camden Road Network Rail station. There is a high cost and severe disruption associated with building such a link which cannot be justified given the relatively small benefit. Handrails on Buses Question No: 108 / 2006 Geoff Pope Is bright yellow the colour which is most visible to people with a visual impairment and if so, why are not handrails on all new buses bright yellow? What guidance does the RNIB give on this issue? Established guidelines by the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee (DPTAC: who draw up guidelines based on consultation with disability groups including the RNIB), recommend that hand rails should be highlighted with a maximum level of contrast. The colour should be chosen to stand out from surrounding surfaces including interior wall panels and seat coverings. As each operator has a slightly different interior scheme within their buses, the latest TfL vehicle specification calls for a contrasting colour from a range of four colour options. This is in line with best practice. Wheelchair Access on Buses Question No: 109 / 2006 Geoff Pope Are all bus drivers instructed to allow wheelchair users to enter the bus before able bodied passengers to save bus dwell times and to make it easier to manoeuvre the wheelchair? Bus driver training has been standardised through the introduction of TfL’s BTEC qualification and disability equality training is a key part. Although circumstances may vary, the guidance given to bus drivers is to allow passengers to disembark then deploy the ramp so that the wheelchair user may board. Once the wheelchair ramp has been retracted, all other passengers can board via the front doors. It ensures wheelchair users are able to board more easily. These guidelines have been produced in leaflet for drivers called ‘Getting It Right’ and in a separate leaflet for disabled users called ‘Get on Board’. Failures on London Underground Question No: 110 / 2006 Geoff Pope Please provide total number of (a) track (b) signalling (c) rolling stock failures which have occurred on each of the London Underground lines in the year 2005/6 so far. The table below sets out the numbers of failures on each line for the first nine periods of 2005-06 (1 April to 10 December). The figures represent the number of failures that were attributable to Infracos and that resulted in service disruptions of 2 minutes or more. Rolling Line Track Signals Stock Bakerloo 17 50 534 Central 24 264 1045 Circle & Hammersmith 38 123 387 District 58 304 480 East London 6 15 61 Jubilee 52 106 381 Metropolitan 44 185 654 Northern 64 338 1416 Piccadilly 44 82 543 Victoria 25 159 386 Waterloo and City 0 19 26 Total 372 1645 5913 Bob Kiley Affordable Housing Question No: 111 / 2006 Dee Doocey Are you aware that in view your Answer to my Question 2349/2005 you are in effect proposing to budget for between £227,500 and £260,000 to subsidise Bob Kiley’s tenure of the £2.1 million house bought for him by TfL? Additionally, if expenditure on the upkeep of this house runs at the same level as it has over the past four years, TfL can expect to pay in the region of a further £87,500? Would not other key workers in London seeking affordable housing feel that £347,500 of public money could be spent more appropriately? The figures outlined in MQT 2349/2005 are correct. However, I do not expect that the upkeep will remain at the level that you indicated as a considerable proportion of the maintenance costs related to non-recurring repairs such as work on the roof. No one is more committed than I to addressing the housing needs of Londoners including key workers. In relation to Bob Kiley, I would point out the tremendous contribution he has made to improving the transport system in London. Key workers are obvious beneficiaries of this. Safer Neighbourhood Teams Question No: 112 / 2006 Sally Hamwee How will Safer Neighbourhood Teams be funded in future years? This is given in the table on page 9 of the budget document which shows the three main sources of funding. In 2007-08 the re-directed budget is increasing by inflation from £27m to £27.8m, grant from the neighbourhood policing fund is increasing from £16.3m to £32.1m and there is a net growth in the budget from £31.8m to £58.8m to be funded from general grants/precept. Safer Neighbourhood Teams Question No: 113 / 2006 Sally Hamwee What is the full year cost of a full Safer Neighbourhood Team rolled out in a full year? The MPA inform me that the full year cost of a full SNT rolled out in a full year is £366,310 (excluding pension costs) based on 1 Police Sergeant 2 Police Constables 3 PCSOs. Safer Neighbourhood Teams Question No: 114 / 2006 Graham Tope Can you confirm, for the record, that no existing Safer Neighbourhood Teams will have any members of their team redeployed to another ward in order to achieve the ‘advance team’ roll out announced by yourself and Sir Ian Blair on 10 January 2006? Yes. The MPS has no intention to transfer resources from existing Safer Neighbourhood Teams. Safer Neighbourhood Teams Question No: 115 / 2006 Sally Hamwee Why will the cost of completing the roll out of Safer Neighbourhood Teams almost double from £48.1M in 2006/07 to £90.9M in 2007/08 and 2008/09, as identified on page 43 of your budget consultation document? The reason for the increase is due to the budget in 2006-07 providing for roll out during the year, whereas the 2007-08 budget reflects the full year cost. The table on page 43 includes only the additional costs (over and above 2005-06), whereas the table on page 9 also includes the re-direction of existing budget. Safer Neighbourhood Team Question No: 116 / 2006 Dee Doocey Where will Borough Commanders find the resources to complete the minimum 4-officer Safer Neighbourhood Teams across every London ward by April 2006? Of the 625 wards in London, more than 280 already have safer neighbourhood teams in place. The resources to roll out the minimum model in April 2006. consisting of one sergeant, one PC and two PCSOs, for the wards without teams will come through several different routes. As part of the roll out, boroughs are aligning permanent beat officers with safer neighbourhood teams to provide some of the sergeants and PCs required. The MPS deployment plan will identify the additional officers required and allocate them to boroughs. Boroughs also have PCSOs that are not currently part of the safer neighbourhood teams. They too will be aligned. In addition, recruitment is already underway for additional PCSOs to enable the MPS to complete the minimum model in April and the full teams by September 2006. This will be accommodated within the proposed budget. Safer Neighbourhood Teams Question No: 117 / 2006 Graham Tope Do you agree with the Assistant Commissioner for Territorial Policing that Safer Neighbourhood Teams comprising less than 6 personnel are “invisible”? It is planned that full teams of six officers (comprising of one sergeant, two PCs and three PCSOs) will be operational in every neighbourhood during 2006/07. In the meantime the foundations of a safer neighbourhood team of a minimum of four officers in place by the end of April 2006 in every ward is welcome. In addition, discussions are taking place to provide additional PCSOs in neighbourhoods with large populations to ensure visibility and adequate policing. Safer neighbourhood teams provide a visible, reassuring presence to Londoners. They engage with local people to solve local problems. Where safer neighbourhood teams are already operating Londoners are happier with the way their neighbourhood is being policed. In Tower Hamlets, where local authority funding has already enabled all neighbourhoods to have a dedicated team, reported crime is falling at nearly six times the rate that crime is falling across London. Safer Neighbourhood Teams Question No: 118 / 2006 Dee Doocey What proportion of the posts in the accelerated roll-out are genuinely new, rather than transferred from existing functions? The Safer Neighbourhoods Programme will utilise 500 existing police officer posts and will grow by 650 police officers, 1104 PCSOs. This equates to the service providing 22% of the resources 78% in new growth for the full roll out. Airwave Question No: 119 / 2006 Graham Tope What proportion of officers in the MPS carry radios capable of accessing the Airwave network? I am told by the MPS that 11,500 Airwave radio handsets have been issued to MPS officers to date, representing 37% of all Police Officers. That number is increasing weekly. The officers concerned are mainly specialist officers such as Transport OCU, Royal Parks OCU, Special Branch, Anti-Terrorist Branch, Palace of Westminster and similar. Thames Gateway Question No: 120 / 2006 Sally Hamwee What is your response to the IPPR Report ‘Gateway People’ which highlighted the need for Thames Gateway developments to offer more than affordability in order to promote the development of genuinely mixed communities? I have always been clear that development in the Thames Gateway should contribute to the creation of sustainable communities, with benefits to new and existing residents and workers. Affordability of housing is an important factor for the area, but so to are jobs, access to good transport, education, and health facilities and to green space. The IPPR report reiterates these points that have already been recognised by myself and others. Thames Gateway Question No: 121 / 2006 Sally Hamwee In the light of the IPPR Report ‘Gateway People’, what action will be taken to ensure that existing communities in the Thames Gateway are better informed about the benefits of developments in their area? Communities in the Thames Gateway are informed about developments in their area in a number of ways, most importantly through their local authority, through their Local Strategic Partnership and statutory consultation on planning applications for new developments. Information and support on more strategic initiatives is available from the Thames Gateway London Partnership and the London Thames Gateway Forum, created specifically to support and encourage community participation in the regeneration in the Thames Gateway. Hackney Broadway Market Question No: 122 / 2006 Sally Hamwee What discussions have been held with Hackney Council over their decision to sell off property in Broadway Market for the development of upmarket flats, and whether this is in line with policies for urban development as outlined in the London Plan? My officers have not been involved in discussions with Hackney Council over this issue. This is a matter for the local Council. Hackney Question No: 123 / 2006 Sally Hamwee Are you satisfied that concerns of local residents have been taken into account in planning decisions made over the development of Broadway Market in Hackney? I have not taken a view as this is a local planning matter. Octavia Estates Question No: 124 / 2006 Dee Doocey Do you support the tenants of the Octavia Hill estates in Vauxhall, Waterloo and Walworth in their opposition to plans by the Church Commissioners to sell these estates? Will you write to the Commissioners and the Archbishop of Canterbury asking them reconsider their decision, and if they will not change their minds, call on the Commissioners to only sell the estates to a registered social landlord? As I noted in my earlier reply to a similar question by Valerie Shawcross, I am of course concerned wherever there is the possibility of a change of ownership resulting in an adverse change of circumstances for the residents. I support the principle that sales of affordable housing – where absolutely necessary – should be made to an agency that will seek as far as possible to keep rents at affordable levels, and with no loss of security of tenure. My direct housing powers do not give me any authority with regard to such matters. Nor indeed would the new powers that are proposed under the merging of regional housing and planning. Issues of the legal protection for tenants are a matter of national law. However, my officers have already informally contacted both sides in the dispute to see if anything can be done. The Church Commissioners are adamant that their legal obligations provide them with no alternative but to seek the best (ie maximum) possible financial return from investments, in order to support clergy stipends etc; the tenants’ representatives dispute this point of law. Setting a stipulation that a property portfolio can only be sold to one type of party would almost certainly breach the requirement to maximise income. From these informal discussions by my officers, it appears that there is a strong likelihood that the most recent disposal will in fact be to a registered social landlord on the basis of the bids received. This will be in line with the previous disposal, which went to a joint consortium that included an RSL. The Church Commissioners were keen to stress that they will deal only with agencies that can demonstrate a good track record in housing management. Notwithstanding the restrictions on my legal powers, I would be pleased to write in these terms to the Commissioners and the Archbishop of Canterbury to ask them to reconsider and, if not, to ask them to use all their efforts and powers to sell only to a registered social landlord. * Food Strategy Question No: 125 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey Given your stated objective to use “the power of public procurement... to transform food markets and drive sustainability”, what proportion of London¿s food economy is dependant on public sector purchasing? Please define the total and then provide separate figures for major elements such as school meals and hospital catering. Although there are no precise figures for London, the potential for public procurement to help improve health and sustainability, and its economic impact is extensive. The public sector in England spends around £2 billion a year on food and catering. London’s share of that is considerable, thought to be in the order of £160million a year in schools and £80million a year in hospitals. Although these figures are approximate, they illustrate the contribution this sector can make economically, in improving the health of the people eating the meals and in making the food sector more sustainable. Food Strategy Question No: 126 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey Which NHS Trusts are currently experimenting with the sustainable procurement of food as part of the emerging London food strategy and with what results? Sustainable food procurement will be a key element in the London food strategy. The Royal Brompton hospital, St George’s hospital, the South London and Maudsley Trust and Ealing General have, since January 2004 been working to increase the proportion of local and/or organic food to 10% of their routine catering, within current budgets and supply systems. Almost 15% of the Royal Brompton’s catering is now from local and/or organic sources, with the other hospitals still working towards the 10% target. The pilot run by Sustain ends in spring 2006 and they are seeking funding to extend the project to around twenty hospitals and care homes. Air Quality Question No: 127 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey In the light of recent studies undertaken for the British Thoracic Society, what action can be taken to reduce particulate levels in Oxford Street, found to be around five times higher than levels in Hyde Park? Road transport is the largest source of air pollution emissions in London, particularly in central London and along busy roads, such as Oxford Street. I have a number of initiatives to reduce emissions from road transport. This includes: - implementing a Low Emission Zone (LEZ), which subject to consultation would discourage the most polluting lorries, buses and coaches from London’s streets, - my Taxi Emission Strategy which will make London’s 20,000 black cabs meet stringent emission limits, - my TfL Bus improvement programme - all my buses now meet a minimum Euro II emission standard and have a particulate filter, which reduces particulate matter (PM) emissions by 90% - this has saved 375 tonnes of PM since 1999 - I am also trialling three zero-emission hydrogen powered buses, and - my congestion charging scheme and other initiatives which encourage Londoners to cycle, walk or use public transport instead of travelling by car – London is the only major city to have achieved a modal shift away from the private car. I am sure I can count on the whole-hearted support of the Lib Dems for making London a Low Emission Zone. London Waterways Commission Question No: 128 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey How much has it cost to set up the London Waterways Commission and what is its annual budget? The financial cost has been nil, aside from staff time. The Commission does not have an annual budget. The Commission may bid for resources, either to the GLA or other bodies for funds for specific projects, any such bids will have to be considered against the range of other competing bids. Officers from the GLA and TfL will continue to provide both administrative and technical support to the Commission within reasonable limits. London Waterways Commission Question No: 129 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey Through what means, and in what timeframe, will the London Waterways Commission issue advice on the enhanced use of London’s waterways? How will its performance be measured? I expect the Commission to send me minutes of its meetings and any specific reports or conclusions that it comes to. In practice of course this will normally go through my officers and I expect the Commission to engage my officers in the first instance. I do not currently propose any specific performance measures for the Commission but I will review its membership and overall performance on an annual basis. Interceptor Tunnel Question No: 130 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey Given that the Environment Agency remains in favour of an Interceptor Tunnel as the ‘only long term, viable, and cost effective solution’ to protect the Thames tideway from the adverse effects of wastewater, what is your position on the OFWAT review of the Thames Tideway Strategic Study, which reported scope for alternative solutions? It is not only the Environment Agency that believe the Interceptor Tunnel is the most economic and sustainable long term option to deal with this. The Thames Tideway Steering Group, on which I am represented and comprises Thames Water, Environment Agency, DEFRA and OfWAT are observers also hold this view. The Ofwat Review revealed some differences in technical assessment and did not resolve the outstanding legal position on whether or not issues had to be tackled as a statutory requirement. My view is that project is needed for London’s sustainable future and no amount of tinkering at the edges will overcome the need for a comprehensive solution. The further challenge will be to ensure that London continues to be developed sustainably over the next 100 years to ensure that we will not need another Interceptor Tunnel. London Underground Recycling Question No: 131 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey What was the outcome of Metronet’s feasibility study into terminus station recycling and what opportunities have been identified by London Underground for further recycling opportunities on the tube network? Metronet has assessed the viability of implementing a recycling scheme for those terminus stations which they are responsible for maintaining. All have been found suitable for implementation of recycling. Metronet is planning to open a tender process later this year. London Underground Recycling Question No: 132 / 2006 Mike Tuffrey What percentage of waste collected in underground trains and stations was recycled in the last financial year and what progress has been made by Tubelines and Metronet to implement a paper recycling scheme? Please see response to 131/2006. Olympic Aquatic Centre Question No: 133 / 2006 Dee Doocey When do you expect the Olympic Aquatics Centre to be completed, and at what cost? The interim Olympic Delivery Authority are in the planning phase of all the construction work which means that they are looking in detail at what we need to build and the associated timelines and costs. Ultimately there is only one thing that matters – that these facilities are ready for the Games and the test events we are committed to hold in advance. They will be. Winter Wonderland Question No: 134 / 2006 Dee Doocey How much did the borough of Westminster contribute to the Winter Wonderland campaign? How will the project be evaluated? Westminster City Council worked in partnership with the GLA to support the delivery of the Winter Wonderland Campaign. It was not a financial partnership. The project will be evaluated by Visit London, using standard marketing metrics such as hits to the campaign micro site, and increases in on line bookings for hotels and events. West London Tram Question No: 135 / 2006 Richard Barnes Following your answers to questions 2257/2005 and 2258/2005 regarding the West London Tram project, could you tell me what will happen to West Middlesex Golf Club when the proposed substation is constructed in the middle of the fourth fairway as outlined in the second round consultation? There is no substation proposed on the West Middlesex Golf Club. TfL are holding discussions with the Golf Club in relation to a proposed temporary construction compound on their land. However, TfL do not intend to place a construction compound on the fairway. Police Officer Pension Question No: 136 / 2006 Richard Barnes What is the current surplus in Police Officer pensions retained by the Metropolitan Police Authority? The Police Officer Pension Reserve currently amounts to £23.5m - having being reduced from £45.5m by the use of £22m to support the budget during 2005/06. Although new financing arrangements for police officer pensions were formally announced on 29th November 2005 and will be implemented from April 2006, there are still some risks to the authority for which reserves will still be required. The Authority will still retain responsibility for the cost of ill health retirements and injury awards and the reserve will be needed to mitigate possible volatility in the numbers of these cases (and their individual costs). Whilst reasonable estimates have been included in the budget for these items, 2006/07 will be the first year of the new financing arrangements and there is a risk that other unforeseen consequences of the changeover might emerge. It is thus proposed to retain the reserve at its current level and to review it once the first year of changeover has been completed. Police Officer Ages Question No: 137 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with a breakdown of officer ages, split by sex into the following age bands? 18-25, 26-30, 31-35, 36-40, 41-45, 46-50, 50-60, 60+. The table below provides the latest Metropolitan Police Service workforce statistics for November 2005. It shows a standard age breakdown of police officers (by sex) that is one year different to the requested range. I have been informed that providing an exact match would require protracted re-calculation work to be carried out by the police. Table 1: Police strength by age and gender (November 2005) Total Female Number % Number % Lower than 20 13 0.0% 4 0.1% 20-24 2126 6.8% 674 11.0% 25-29 5483 17.6% 1545 25.3% 30-34 4991 16.0% 1224 20.1% 35-39 5776 18.5% 1192 19.5% 40-44 6211 19.9% 858 14.1% 45-49 4835 15.5% 472 7.7% 50-54 1478 4.7% 116 1.9% 55-59 275 0.9% 15 0.2% 60 and over 0 0.0% 0 Total 31,187 100.0% 6100 100% Alcohol Fuelled Violence Question No: 138 / 2006 Richard Barnes The Home Office provided a grant of £421,000 to the Metropolitan Police Service for distribution to the Boroughs to help tackle alcohol fuelled violence in the run up to Christmas. Can you provide details of how much each Borough will receive (actual amounts) and advise whether there is a specific formula for distribution? Is it based upon population, offence statistics or the number of licensed premises in each Borough? In December 2005 the Home Office issued funds to the Police Standards Unit (PSU) to help tackle alcohol fuelled violence. The PSU allocated funds to police Borough Command Units (BCU) based on level of crime in BCU areas. The 138 BCUs nationally with the highest levels of alcohol fuelled violent crime were allocated funds on a sliding scale; all other BCUs were offered a £3,000 minimum payment. A breakdown of payments made to the 32 London Boroughs are outlined below £25k Brent Hackney Islington Lambeth Southwark Westminster £10k Barking & Dagenham Croydon Ealing Enfield Greenwich Hammersmith and Fulham Redbridge Tower Hamlets Wansworth Waltham Forest Newham Lewisham Hounslow Hillingdon Haringey Camden Barnet £3k Sutton Richmond Merton Kingston Kensington & Chelsea Havering Harrow Bromley Bexley Efficiency Savings Question No: 139 / 2006 Richard Barnes Each Borough Commander has been asked to find efficiency savings as part of the 2006/07 budget setting process. Can you provide me with a list of how much each Borough has asked to save? The detailed allocations within the MPS budget have not yet been finalised. A significant portion of the MPS’ existing expenditure (ie. the 10% on Counter Terrorism) has not been re-confirmed definitely by the Government; nor has there been any statement on the MPS’ Counter Terrorism growth bid to fund the policing challenges of the new normality following the July bombings in London. Until all this is decided, it is not possible for the MPS to make final decisions on what each borough will be asked to save. Territorial Policing Question No: 140 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Wandsworth from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? The attached table (Appendix C) shows annual Police strength by borough from 2000/01 to 2004/05. Police Community Safety Office strength for each year is also provided but is not broken down by borough: workforce reports did not provide monthly borough Police Community Safety Office strength until the start of 2005/06. As such this detail is provided in the appended table from April to November 2005, which is the most up to date information available. Territorial Policing Question No: 141 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Barking & Dagenham from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 142 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Barnet from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 143 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Bexley from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006* Territorial Policing Question No: 144 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Brent from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 145 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Bromley from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 146 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Camden from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 147 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Croydon from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 148 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Ealing from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 149 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Enfield from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 150 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Greenwich from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 151 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Hackney from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 152 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Hammersmith & Fulham from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 153 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Haringey from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 154 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Harrow from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 155 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Havering from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 156 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Hillingdon from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 157 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Hounslow from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 158 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Islington from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 159 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Kensington & Chelsea from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 160 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Kingston upon Thames from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 161 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Lambeth from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 162 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Lewisham from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 163 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Merton from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 164 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Newham from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 165 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Redbridge from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 166 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Richmond upon Thames from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 167 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Southwark from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 168 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Sutton from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 169 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Tower Hamlets from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 170 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Waltham Forest from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Territorial Policing Question No: 171 / 2006 Richard Barnes Can you provide me with month on month details of the Territorial Policing BOCU strength in Westminster from June 2000 onwards broken down between police officers and PCSOs? Please refer to the response to 140/2006 Newham Parks Constabulary Question No: 172 / 2006 Richard Barnes Do you think it is appropriate for officers of Newham Parks Constabulary to operate outside the boundaries of Newham Parks? Newham Parks Constabulary are the responsibility of Newham Local Authority and are not MPS employees. The Community Constabulary has different powers in parks and open spaces than they have elsewhere. Whilst they have powers of arrest with regard to offences against park regulations and open space legislation, they do not have such powers when they are outside these areas. I understand that a review of their current working practices took place and a number of recommendations were made. Newham Parks Constabulary have contributed to the review, and the full report is available on the LB Newham website. Anti-Social Behaviour Orders Question No: 173 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Anti-Social Behaviour Orders have been issued in London in 2004? Can you break this down Borough by Borough? The latest annual London ASBO figures are available for 2003 and 2004. These show a 205 per cent increase in this period. The latest monthly figures are available for January to June 2005, during which 224 ASBOs were issued in London. Borough details are provided in the table below. Area 2003 2004 Change % Jan – Jun 2005 GREATER LONDON 96 293 205 224 Barking and Dagenham(1) - 2 … 3 Barnet(2) 1 9 800 4 Bexley(3) 4 4 0 4 Brent(4) 7 5 -29 5 Bromley(5) 5 3 -40 2 Camden(6) 21 36 71 19 City of London(7) - 5 … 2 Croydon(8) 6 7 17 1 Ealing(9) 1 11 1000 3 Enfield(10) 1 3 200 9 Greenwich(11) 3 5 67 8 Hackney(12) 1 5 400 6 Hammersmith & Fulham(13) 2 8 300 8 Haringey(14) - 17 … 13 Harrow(15) - 6 … 1 Havering(16) 1 7 600 10 Hillingdon(17) - 12 … 19 Hounslow(18) 5 17 240 9 Islington(19) 7 5 -29 4 Kensington & Chelsea Royal Borough(20) 1 8 700 6 Kingston-on-Thames(21) 4 3 -25 2 Lambeth(22) - 16 … 9 Lewisham(23) 3 8 167 6 Merton(24) 2 11 450 4 Newham(25) - 5 … 3 Richmond upon Thames(26) 3 8 167 8 Southwark(27) 6 7 17 9 Sutton(28) 2 5 150 10 Tower Hamlets(29) 2 14 600 19 Waltham Forest(30) - 12 … 5 Wandsworth(31) 3 9 200 5 Westminster(32) 5 20 300 8 Anti-Social Behaviour Orders Question No: 174 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Anti-Social Behaviour Orders have been issued in London in 2005? Can you break this down Borough by Borough? Please refer to the response to 173/2006 Anti-Social Behaviour Orders Question No: 175 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many people in London have been returned to Court for breaching an Anti-social Behaviour Order? I have been informed that the only available Home Office statistics relate to the period between June 2000 and December 2003. London Magistrates’ Courts reported issuing 146 ASBOs, of which 46 were breached. This equates to 31 per cent, which was lower than the equivalent national figure of 41 per cent. Buncefield Depot Question No: 176 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Metropolitan Police Officers were abstracted to assist Hertfordshire Police following the fire at Buncefield Depot? Officers deployed to mutual aid to Hertfordshire Constabulary December 2005 Date Insp PS's PC's Total 11.12.2005 11 33 231 275 12.12.2005 13 42 294 349 13.12.2005 9 27 189 225 14.12.2005 6 18 126 150 Total 39 120 840 999 Special Constables Question No: 177 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables have been recruited as part of the Shopwatch Scheme London-wide? I have been informed by the MPS that 57 individuals have been recruited. A strong focus on negotiation with the retail industry in the second half of 2005 has meant that now over 20 household name retail chains support the scheme at various levels and many are about to start their recruitment campaigns, which should lead to a significant boost to applicant numbers. Most of these stores expressed a wish to wait until after their peak trading periods of October to January inclusive before working with the MPS on recruiting their staff into ShopWatch. Special Constables Question No: 178 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables have been recruited as part of the Hospitalwatch Scheme London-wide? The development and negotiation phase of HospitalWatch, which is one strand of the MPS' overall MSC Employer Support Programme, has only recently been completed. On 7 December 2005, the Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust launched its HospitalWatch recruitment drive. Final plans are being made with two further Trusts to launch recruitment drives before the end of February 2006 and negotiations are taking place with a number of other Trusts and central NHS Security departments. Therefore no special constables have yet been recruited but early indications show a strong level of interest from the NHS staff and management communities. Special Constables Question No: 179 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables operated within London in 2000? Can you break this down by Borough? 758 Special Constables operated within London in 2000. Unfortunately, it is not possible to provide a BOCU breakdown. Special Constables Question No: 180 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables operated within London in 2001? Can you break this down by Borough? 774 Special Constables operated within London in 2001. Unfortunately it is not possible to provide a BOCU breakdown. Special Constables Question No: 181 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables operated within London in 2002? Can you break this down by Borough? 680 Special Constables operated within London in 2002. Unfortunately it is not possible to provide a BOCU breakdown. Special Constables Question No: 182 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables operated within London in 2003? Can you break this down by Borough? 727 Special Constables operated in London in 2003. Unfortunately it is not possible to provide a BOCU breakdown. Special Constables Question No: 183 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables operated within London in 2004? Can you break this down by Borough? 726 Special Constables operated in London in 2004. Unfortunately it is not possible to provide a BOCU breakdown. Special Constables Question No: 184 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many Special Constables operated within London in 2005? Can you break this down by Borough? Please refer to the table below. You will note the End of Year figure of 993 does not tally with the Total of 884 on Borough Operational Command Units (BOCUs) on the sheet. This is due to members still in training or who have joined the BOCUs but who have not been placed on MetHR. Number of MSC* - Totals B/OCU Code B/OCU Return CoW - Belgravia AB 12 Kensington & Chelsea BS 27 Marine Support Unit CO18(2)/MSU 11 CoW - West End Central CD 18 CoW - Westminster CW 20 CoW - Charing Cross CX 16 CoW - Marylebone DM 38 CoW - Paddington DP 25 Camden EK 29 Hammersmith & Fulham FH 26 Hackney GD 10 Tower Hamlets HT 24 Heathrow ID/SO18 16 Waltham Forest JC 14 Redbridge JI 18 Havering KD 31 Newham KF 15 Barking and Dagenham KG 10 Lambeth LX 25 Southwark MD 12 Islington NI 23 Lewisham PL 18 Bromley PY 12 Harrow QA 11 Brent QK 25 Greenwich RG 21 Royal Parks RO 9 Bexley RY 94 Financial Investigations SCD6 2 Barnet SX 50 TPHQ TPHQ 7 Tasking Unit TU 4 Richmond upon Thames TW 22 Hounslow TX 12 Kingston upon Thames VK 22 Merton VW 15 Wandsworth WW 17 Ealing XD 15 Hillingdon XH 20 Enfield YE 17 Haringey YR 20 Croydon ZD 16 Sutton ZT 5 TOTALS 854 AVERAGE 19.86 *MSC – Metropolitan Police Special Constabulary Special Constables Question No: 185 / 2006 Richard Barnes What happens to the free Travelcard/Oyster provided to Special Constables should they decide to cease duties with the Metropolitan Police Service? The free travel concession for Special Constables is provided by means of the constable’s Police Warrant Card. When anyone leaves the Metropolitan Police Service, the Warrant Card is returned and the free travel concession ceases. Special Constables Question No: 186 / 2006 Richard Barnes When Special Constables commence duties with the Metropolitan Police Service are they provided with a standard Zone 1 ¿ 6 Travelcard/Oyster? If not, how is free travel on London buses and the Underground defined? Special Constables are not provided with a Travelcard season ticket. Free travel is permitted on production of the Police Warrant Card. The free travel includes all TfL Tube, bus, DLR and tram services. Car-jackings Question No: 187 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many car-jackings took place in London in 2000? Can you break this down by Borough? No figures are available for this offence for the year 2000. Car-jacking Question No: 188 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many car-jackings took place in London in 2001? Can you break this down by Borough? Please refer to Appendix D Car-jackings Question No: 189 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many car-jackings took place in London in 2002? Can you break this down by Borough? Please refer to Appendix D Car-jackings Question No: 190 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many car-jackings took place in London in 2003? Can you break this down by Borough? Please refer to Appendix D Car-jackings Question No: 191 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many car-jackings took place in London in 2004? Can you break this down by Borough? Please refer to Appendix D Car-jackings Question No: 192 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many car-jackings took place in London in 2005? Can you break this down by Borough? Please refer to Appendix D Independent Advisory Groups Question No: 193 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many London-wide Independent Advisory Groups (IAGs) are funded by the Metropolitan Police Service? Can you provide a list of these groups along with the amount of funding received broken down year by year from 2000 to date? 8 Independent Advisory Groups (IAGs) are funded by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). These are Race IAG, Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Advisory Group (LGBT AG), Gypsy and Traveler Advisory Group, MPS Youth Advisory Group (MYAG), Disability IAG (DIAG), Trident IAG (Gun crime in the black community), Sapphire IAG (rape and sexual offending), Safeguarding Children IAG, Operation Blunt IAG (targeting knife crime). Funding for each of these groups is detailed below: Race IAG (2000) LGBT AG (2000) Gypsy and Traveler Advisory Group (2003) MYAG (2003) DIAG (2004) Administered by the MPS Diversity Directorate, the above IAGs have an annual joint budget of £100,000, which has remained static since 2000. Trident IAG (2000) 2000: no financial information available 2001 – 02: £2,600 2002 – 03: £4,500 2003 – 04: £8,500 2004 – 05: £12,500 (incl. training and conference costs) 2005 – 06: £16,700 (incl. staff costs of 1 administration officer) Sapphire IAG (2001) No specific funding allocation. Minimal expense claims are met from the central Sapphire budget. Safeguarding Children IAG (2003) No specific funding allocation Blunt IAG (2005) No specific funding allocation. Independent Advisory Groups Question No: 194 / 2006 Richard Barnes What is the allowance structure for an Independent Advisory Group (IAG)? Does this differ from IAG to IAG? In 2000, the then Deputy Assistant Commissioner John Grieve declared that independent advisors ‘should not be out of pocket’ for their participation and contributions on MPS IAGs and that suitable remuneration should be offered. Thus, the IAG and Diversity Directorate, devised a joint finance protocol, based upon the ‘Seven Principles of Public Life’ as set out in the Nolan Committee’s First Report on Standards in Public Life’ The protocol detailed how advisors could make claims, the processes involved, payment levels, authorisation and auditing procedures. MPS IAG (Race), Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender Advisory Group, Disability Independent Advisory Group, Gypsy & Traveler Advisory Group, MPS Youth Advisory Group are all offered remuneration, in sums ranging between £25 -£75 for attending a half a day’s activity (equivalent to approx. 4 hrs.) and up to £150 for a whole day (equivalent to approx.8 hrs.). Operation Trident, Sapphire IAGs and Blunt IAG do not offer remuneration but reasonable expenses for travel. Not all IAG members claim for the time and expense they incur as members of MPS IAG’s Independent Advisory Groups Question No: 195 / 2006 Richard Barnes What is the budget for Independent Advisory Groups (IAG) London-wide? The MPS does not have a specific budget for Independent Advisory Groups. Funds are allocated from the devolved budgets of the relevant directorates and departments. Independent Advisory Groups Question No: 196 / 2006 Richard Barnes Do you agree that Independent Advisory Groups compromise their independence by being funded directly by the Metropolitan Police Service? No, the independence of Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Advisory Groups is not compromised by direct MPS funding. Members of Independent Advisory Groups (IAGs) are non-police persons that range from community representatives, academic researchers to voluntary sector practitioners. Advice given by members of IAG is independent of the police and carries no responsibility or liability for MPS service delivery or actions. IAG members offer independent advise on MPS initiatives. This process ensures that the MPS receives a critical appraisal of operations / initiatives from members that may have a better insight into, and understanding of the communities policed by the MPS. Expense and subsistence payments are offered by the MPS to some members of IAGs. Members are not employees of the MPS or paid consultants; they volunteer their time and should not be paid. The MPS Directorate of Legal Services (DLS) recently carried out a review of the legal and ethical position of offering IAG member’s expenses and subsistence payments. The review concluded that ‘in offering reasonable expenses to IAG members and accounting for these payments, the MPS is acting in an appropriate manner that allows members to retain their independence’ Metropolitan Police Authority Question No: 197 / 2006 Richard Barnes Would you use powers to appoint independent members to the Metropolitan Police Authority as outlined in the ODPM Consultation on Mayoral Powers or would you prefer an interview/selection process based on merit to avoid calls of cronyism? The ODPM consultation on the review of GLA powers does not propose a new method of appointing members of the MPA, but merely makes the point that the Chair of the MPA has a role in the selection of independent members. I believe that independent members of the MPA should continue to be appointed on merit following open recruitment to ensure that the MPA is in the best possible position to carry out its functions and responsibilities. Cultural Organisations Question No: 198 / 2006 Richard Barnes DA 1196 dated 22nd December 2003 approved “the procurement of a consultant that will carry out research into benchmarking the provision of disability access (to cultural organisations and their services), to include a detailed study of 60 major cultural organisations across the sector in both inner and outer London, for a value up to £20,000.” Who conducted this research, which organisations were studied, what was the final cost and is a copy of their findings available for inspection? The report is now available on the GLA website at: www.london.gov.uk/gla/publications/culture.jsp Shape, the arts and disability agency for London conducted the research. The cost was £20,000 in total. The list of organisations that contributed to the research can be found at Appendix IV at the end of the report mentioned above. Registered Sex Offenders Question No: 199 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many registered sex offenders resided in London in 2000? Can this figure be broken down by Borough? I have been informed that this information has not been recorded by the MPS. Registered Sex Offenders Question No: 200 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many registered sex offenders resided in London in 2001? Can this figure be broken down by Borough? In the period April 2001-March 2002, a total of 1847 registered sex offenders resided in London. The MPS has informed me that there are no figures available by Borough. Registered Sex Offenders Question No: 201 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many registered sex offenders resided in London in 2002? Can this figure be broken down by Borough? In the period April 2002-March 2003 a total of 2085 registered sex offenders resided in London. The MPS has informed me that there are no figures available by Borough. Registered Sex Offenders Question No: 202 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many registered sex offenders resided in London in 2003? Can this figure be broken down by Borough? For the period April 2003-March 2004 a total of 2272 registered sex offenders resided in London. The MPS has informed that there are no figures available by Borough. Registered Sex Offenders Question No: 203 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many registered sex offenders resided in London in 2004? Can this figure be broken down by Borough? In the period April 2004-March 2005 a total of 2657 registered sex offenders resided in London. The MPS has informed me that there are no figures available by Borough. Registered Sex Offenders Question No: 204 / 2006 Richard Barnes How many registered sex offenders resided in London in 2005? Can this figure be broken down by Borough? In the period 1 April to 31 November 2005 a total of 2964 registered sex offenders resided in London. I have been informed that figures can be broken down by Borough but are not in the public domain. This is a Strategic Management Board decision that areas will not release individual borough figures. In addition, the figures held are not ratified, as the IT system (ViSOR) is not yet configured to produce such data. Police Recruits Question No: 205 / 2006 Tony Arbour How have the entry qualifications for police recruits changed in each year since 2000? There have been no changes to the entry qualifications for police recruits since 2000. It remains the case that no formal educational qualifications are required, as all applicants are subject to an assessment centre. Entry Examinations to the Metropolitan Police Service Question No: 206 / 2006 Tony Arbour Please detail changes to entry examinations to the Metropolitan Police Service in each year since 2000. In 2000 the entry examination for potential police officers consisted of the following elements: Interview (pass or fail) Police initial Recruitment Test – total pass score of 230 required across 5 elements Written Exercise (pass score of 15) The entry examination remained unchanged until 1 August 2002 when the Home Office withdrew one element of the Police Initial Recruitment Test and therefore from that date the entry examination consisted of the following elements: Interview (pass score of 22) Police Initial Recruitment Test – total pass score of 168 required across 4 elements Written Exercise (pass score 12) On 15 April 2003 the Home Office made further changes to the Police Initial Recruitment Test, the removal of two further elements, and this resulted in the entry examination consisting of the following elements: Interview (pass score 22) Police Initial Recruitment Test – total pass score of 83 required across 2 elements Written Exercise (pass score 12) In September 2003 the Home Office introduced the National Recruitment Standards for all applicants wishing to become police officers. The assessment centre comprises the following elements: Interview 4 interactive exercises 2 written exercises 2 elements of the old Police Initial Recruitment Test (verbal logical reasoning and numerical logical reasoning) The competencies tested at the assessment centre are as follows: Respect for race and diversity Teamworking Community and customer focus Effective communication Oral communication Written communication Problem solving Personal responsibility Resilience The overall pass mark was set at 50% in all elements with the exception of written communication where the pass mark was set at 44%. In addition the assessment in each area was marked on an A-D basis and no Ds are allowed. In June 2005 the Home Office raised the overall pass mark to 60% in all elements with the exception of written communication where the pass mark was maintained at 44%. Once again the assessment in each area was marked on an A-D basis and no Ds are allowed. Entry Examinations to the Metropolitan Police Service Question No: 207 / 2006 Tony Arbour Please detail changes in pass rates in entrance examinations to the Metropolitan Police Service in each year since 2000 in terms of gender and ethnicity. The table below details average pass rates at National Recruitment Standards (NRS) events for each year 2003 to 2005. However, when viewing this data is must be noted that only three NRS events were held in 2003 as it was introduced in September of that year, and that in July 2005 the pass mark for the NRS was raised from 50% to 60%, as shown in the last two columns. 2005 2005 (Pass 2005 (Pass 2003 2004 (Overall) mark 50%) mark 60%) BME 38% 64% 50% 58% 35% White 63% 84% 78% 86% 62% Female 66% 85% 75% 80% 65% Male 54% 69% 57% 66% 39% Overall 58% 77% 66% 73% 51% Please note that data prior to 2003 is less systematically recorded and therefore not easily obtainable. Police Recruits Question No: 208 / 2006 Tony Arbour What percentage of police recruits (by gender and ethnicity) have entered Hendon training college with more than 3 A levels in each year since 2000? The information below provides a breakdown of police recruits that have entered Hendon training college with at least three A levels during 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. MPS data for 2000 and 2001 is insufficient and therefore cannot be provided. 2002 2003 2004 2005 BME male 16.19% 18.49% 20.16% 20.0% BME female 24.29% 27.78% 26.80% 40.68% White male 11.64% 10.68% 9.11% 21.44% White female 24.26% 17.98% 22.22% 32.94% Total 14.84% 13.84% 15.88% 25.0% Police Recruits Question No: 209 / 2006 Tony Arbour What percentage of police recruits (by gender and ethnicity) have been university graduates in each year since 2000? The table below provides details of the percentage of university graduate police recruits since 2000: 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 BME male 26.32% 25.0% 17.0% 14.06% 17.79% 17.39% BME female 30.0% 28.57% 25.71% 18.89% 22.68% 35.59% White male 23.29% 14.77% 13.26% 8.53% 7.93% 17.15% White 33.01% 24.69% 27.39% 14.54% 17.35% 27.99% female Total 25.51% 17.49% 16.68% 10.92% 13.14% 20.65% Metropolitan Police Service Training School Question No: 210 / 2006 Tony Arbour Can you provide me with details of the minimum qualification levels for candidates to enter the Metropolitan Police Service training school at Hendon? No formal educational qualifications are required as outlined in my answer to question 205/2006. The minimum qualification levels are the following: · Paper sift against set criteria (convictions, residency, nationality, etc.) · Competency based questions within the application form · National Recruitment Standards assessment centre · Medical · Physical fitness test · References · Security vetting All of the above elements have to be passed before an applicant can enter Training School. Metropolitan Police Service Training School Question No: 211 / 2006 Tony Arbour Can you provide me with details of the drop-out/failure rate of trainees at Hendon Police Training College for each year from 2000 broken down by age, sex and ethnicity? * The percentage of students who have been unsuccessful1 within Metropolitan Police Foundation Training at Hendon Police Training College and other sites, broken down by gender, is as follows: 20002 2001 2002 2003 2004 20053 Male 8.5% 9.8% 12.4% 9.1% 6.5% 2.5% Students Female 6.0% 6.5% 8.2% 7.1% 3.4% 1.6% Students The percentage of students who have been unsuccessful1 within Metropolitan Police Foundation Training at Hendon Training College and other sites, broken down by ethnicity, is as follows: 20002 2001 2002 2003 2004 20053 Black and 13.0% 13.1% 16.6% 15.7% 11.6% 2.3% Minority Ethnic Students4 White 7.7% 8.8% 10.9% 7.4% 4.0% 2.2% Students Data broken down by age is currently unavailable. Trainee PCSOs Question No: 212 / 2006 Tony Arbour Can you provide me with details of the drop-out/failure rates of trainee PCSOs for each year since their inception broken down by age, sex and ethnicity? PCSO training courses commenced in December 2002. They were held at various sites around the Metropolitan Police area. Data for Drop out rates of students is not available for years before 2004, when training provision was amalgamated at the Hendon site. During the financial year 2004/5 a total of 678 PCSO underwent training. 7 students resigned during the training course. Of these, 4 were male and 3 female; none were from black and minority ethnic communities. During the current financial year 2005/6 so far a total of 306 PCSO's have undergone training, with 4 students resigning during the course. Of these, 3 were females from black and ethnic minority communities and 1 was male from a black and ethnic minority community. Data is unavailable in relation to the break down of age for those students resigning during training. Police Constables Question No: 213 / 2006 Tony Arbour Can you provide me with details of the drop-out/failure rate of police Constables still within their probationary period for each year from 2000 broken down by age, sex and ethnicity? The figures and analysis presented below are for drop-outs and failures and include Probationers resigning voluntarily or transferring to other forces, together with those required to resign or dismissed (including dismissals under regulation 13). . Age distribution of Probationary Police Officer Leavers (excludes deceased) Age 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 to Dec 24 and under 26 26 48 34 40 9 25-29 15 14 26 21 37 19 30-39 10 19 33 33.65 32 22 40+ 1 4 3 12 9 totals 52 59 111 91.65 121 59 Age distribution of drop-outs and failures is generally biased towards younger Officers, a reflection on their predominance as a proportion of overall probationer numbers: In January to December 2000, 26 of these leavers were under 25, 15 between 25 and 30, 10 aged between 30-39, and 1 was over 40. In 2001, 26 of the leavers were under 25, 14 between 25-29 and 19 between 30-39, with no probationers over age 40 leaving. In 2002, 48 of the leavers were under 25, 26 aged 25-29, 33 aged 30-39, and 4 aged over 40. For 2003, figures are 34 Officers under 25, 21 aged 25-29, 33 aged 30-39 and 3 over 40. In 2004, 41 probationary leavers were aged under 25, 37 aged 25-29, 32 aged 30-39 and 12 over 40. For 2005, loss figures across all age ranges were significantly lower – 9 Officers under 25, 19 aged 25-29, 22 aged 30-39 and 9 over 40. Gender: Gender distribution of these leavers in 2000 was 43 male and 9 female In 2001 this was 48 male and 11 female. Figures for 2002 were 99 male and 12 female, in 2003 73 male and 18 female, in 2004 100 male and 21 female and in 2005 41 male and 18 female. Ethnicity: o In ethnic terms, 6 of the probationary leavers in 2000 were from BME backgrounds, 46 non-BME. o Figures for 2001 were 3 BME and 56 non-BME o 2002 14 BME and 97 non-BME o 2003 6 BME and 85.65 non-BME o 2004 20 BME and 101 non-BME o for 2005 18 BME and 41 non-BME. BME/non BME/Female and Male Probationer Attrition Rates Dec 02 to Dec 05. The data of total force strength prior to 2002 was not collected in such a way that attrition rates by percentage can be easily tabulated. However, in relation to attrition rates in the MPS and diversity, the following points can be ascertained: o Overall, and except for females, whose attrition rates have slightly increased by 0.6 % in the three-year period studied, attrition rates for all categories are moving downwards. It should be noted that the small number of females, in relation to males, might be the cause of this slight spike in attrition rates for women, rather than an indication of a problem. o Contrary to national findings, the attrition rate for females in the MPS has, over the three-year timeframe, shown that the MPS is more likely to retain female officers than males. o It can be seen from the above table that attrition rates for BMEs and non-BMEs, by percent of total strength, have dropped significantly Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05 from December 2002 and BME 6.6% 1.6% 3.7% 0.2% 2005. Non BME 4.2% 2.7% 2.8% 0.1% o It should also be noted that Female 2.2% 2.3% 1.9% 2.8% the attrition percentages for Male 5.0% 2.7% 3.4% 3.7% BMEs and non-BMEs, which were highly divergent in 2002 are now converging. o As expected, in an organisation where retention rates are so high and there has been such a growth in recruitment, attrition rates, in regard to age, tend to be clustered in the younger age groups. Thus, the attrition rates are highest amongst the 20-24 years of age category, followed by those in the 25-29 category. The figures for those ‘forced to resign’ have remained consistently low; the highest number in this category is 3 in 2003. o Voluntary resignations rose steadily from a low of 51 in 2000, 52 in 2001, 98 in 2002, 72 in 2003, 116 in 2004 and then dropped back considerably to 54 in 2005. Post 9/11 the MPS was forced to re-evaluate its position on recruitment. Prior to this the MPS police workforce had been shrinking, the threat of terrorism placed the organisation under considerable pressure to swell its ranks in order to be able to respond to possible terrorist threats. This pressure is reflected in the spiking of voluntary resignations in 2004. It would appear that equilibrium in voluntary resignations has now been re-established. o The percentage of voluntary resignation for BMEs in relation to non-BME rates fluctuated between 5% and 32% (2000-11%; 2001- 5%; 2002-12%; 2003- 6%; 2004-17%; 2005-32%). However, it must be borne in mind that numerically this represents less than 20 individual BME resignations per year. The relatively smaller number of BMEs in relation to non-BMEs in the MPS means that even very few resignations by BMEs can make a substantial difference to percentages. Junction of Warwick and Old Brompton Road Question No: 214 / 2006 Angie Bray TfL, by its own admission, recognises the need to implement new safety measures at the junction of Warwick Road and Old Brompton Road, after 17 collisions and 23 casualties in the last 3 years. A detailed study was carried out as long ago as 2004, which suggests that the problem was recognised over a year ago. Can the Mayor assure me that this site will be given priority for the London Road Safety Unit’s programme for this coming year, so that we will not have to wait until 2007 (i.e. three years after the safety study) for the junction to be made safe for pedestrians and road users alike? TfL shares your concern in regard to the safety record at this junction, particularly for pedestrians. Since Peter Hendy wrote to you in November 2005, TfL has undertaken an in-depth analysis of the scope for signaled pedestrian crossings of all arms of the junction. Regrettably, this cannot be achieved without introducing major delays to traffic and the four bus routes that operate through the junction, with consequential impacts for the environment generally and risk of casualty migration to elsewhere on the route. TfL’s London Road Safety Unit is currently completing its Programme for 06/07 and will undertake a further examination of potential measures to improve this junction. Motorbikes Question No: 215 / 2006 Angie Bray Will you give your assurance that so long as you are Mayor, motorbikes will never be eligible to pay the Congestion Charge? The primary objective of Congestion Charging is to reduce congestion in Central London. As I stated in March 2005 powered two-wheelers do not contribute significantly to congestion and as such they are exempt from the Charge. For this reason I will not remove the discount for powered two-wheelers. Hybrid Vehicles Question No: 216 / 2006 Angie Bray Why is there any debate about larger hybrid vehicles, such as the Lexus RX400h, losing their Congestion Charge exempt status? The RX400h meets Euro IV standards and the present Powershift Register states that vehicles must meet Euro III standards. Surely the Mayor wants to encourage drivers to buy and use low-emission vehicles by providing Congestion Charge exempt status for motorists? Is this not further proof that the Congestion Charge is first and foremost a tax rather than a genuine attempt to improve London’s air quality? The Powershift register, managed by the Energy Saving Trust on behalf of TfL, determines eligibility for the Congestion Charging discount. The Lexus RX400h has recently been approved and is now on the register. Therefore, owners can now apply for the 100% alternative fuel discount. But the carbon emissions (CO2) for the Lexus are still relatively high compared to other vehicles. TfL is undertaking a comprehensive review of the alternative fuels discount and is considering different approaches which would encourage the uptake of vehicles with better emissions standards. Any proposals to improve the alternative fuel discount, would of course be subject to full public and stakeholder consultation. It should be remembered that the Congestion Charge is first and foremost intended to reduce congestion in central London. Congestion Charge Question No: 217 / 2006 Angie Bray Do you think it is appropriate for Capita to run the congestion charge while at the same time owning Equita - one of the congestion charge bailiff firms? I am satisfied there is no conflict of interests. The two contracts - for the operation and administration of the Congestion Charge, and for the provision of debt recovery services - were awarded by TfL as a result of entirely separate competitive procurement processes conforming to European Union requirements. Court Case Involving Equita Question No: 218 / 2006 Angie Bray Is the Mayor aware of the recent landmark victory in the small claims court against Equita for artificially inflating the rates it levied for the recovery of Congestion-Charge debts? Can the Mayor explain what monitoring procedures TfL maintains over the activities of the bailiffs it employs in order to to prevent maladministration, and why they failed in this instance? Yes I am aware of the recent outcome of the ‘Taxation Order’ taken against Equita. A Taxation Order is defined in the Distress for Rent Rules Act 1988 and states that: “In the case of any difference as to fees, charges and expenses between any of the parties, the fees, charges and expenses shall upon application be taxed by the Registrar of the county court of the district where the distress is levied, and he may make such order as he thinks fit as to the costs of the taxation.” In this particular instance the Judge took the decision, based on the verbal evidence provided by the appellant, that the letters were not sent and visits not undertaken by Equita. This is despite the appellant admitting that he had received Penalty correspondence relating to the case, which he did not respond to thinking that they were receipts. Furthermore Equita were unable to submit more detailed evidence relating to the visits undertaken by the bailiff in question as he had left their employ and was unavailable to support their defence. During 2005, Equita introduced a system for electronically recording visits, which is admissible in court, and which would be used to defend any subsequent cases of this kind. In light of the outcome, and despite the fact that TfL are satisfied that Equita did send the letters and undertake the visits charged for, they are currently working with all their contracted bailiffs, to further enhance the evidence available to defend any such claims. TfL undertake monthly monitoring activities ensuring that the four contracted bailiff companies are applying charges, processing cases and taking enforcement action in line with their contracts and legislation. Where a bailiff company fails to do so, TfL will investigate and take appropriate action. This could result ultimately in the termination of the contract with that bailiff. To date very few instances of failures by the bailiff companies to comply with their contracts and legislation have been identified. Where failures have been identified, these have been satisfactorily and promptly addressed. Number Plate Theft Question No: 219 / 2006 Angie Bray Can you tell me how many number plates have been stolen in the last five years. Broken down by borough and by year? Stolen number plates, MPS by division, 2001 - 2005 Year Division 2003 2004 2005 (Belgravia) 0 12 26 Kensington and Chelsea 0 116 136 (West End central) 0 15 16 (Charing Cross) 0 6 6 (Marylebone) 0 31 36 (Paddington) 0 44 54 Camden 0 113 151 Hammersmith and Fulham 0 80 117 Hackney 1 155 207 Tower Hamlets 1 194 324 Heathrow 0 8 18 Waltham Forest 0 200 380 Redbridge 0 280 422 Havering 1 156 296 Newham 1 336 763 Barking and Dagenham 0 126 248 Lambeth 0 120 200 Southwark 1 164 244 Islington 3 111 92 Lewisham 1 196 285 Bromley 0 250 307 Harrow 0 238 310 Brent 0 146 281 Greenwich 0 181 312 Bexley 0 174 244 Barnet 0 233 435 Richmond 0 66 92 Hounslow 0 222 248 Kingston 0 59 70 Merton 1 100 188 Wandsworth 3 124 168 Ealing 0 228 421 Hillingdon 0 214 355 Enfield 2 204 290 Haringey 3 146 277 Croydon 1 370 582 Sutton 0 74 162 Grand Total 19 5,492 8,763 Please note data was not recorded by the MPS in the periods 2001 and 2002. Zone 1 Travelcard Question No: 220 / 2006 Angie Bray Why has the Zone 1 Travelcard been abolished, does this include the oystercard? The new January fares involved two major changes in Zone 1. The Zone 1 only Travelcard season was withdrawn and the Zone 1 Oyster pay as you go fare on the Tube was reduced from £1.70 to £1.50 – Oyster bus fares were also frozen at £1/80p. TfL believes that, for those previously using Zone 1 travelcards, the choice now offered of Oyster pre-pay or a Zone 1 and 2 travelcard gives an appropriate range of tickets to reflect the wide range of frequency of travel within this particular group. Transport for London estimates that up to half of those who were Zone 1 Travelcard holders will pay little more or even less than in 2005 by switching to Oyster pay as you go. These are people making, say, 10 Tube trips and 5 bus trips a week. For such customers, the cost per trip will be, on average, about £1.50 per ride. Other former zone 1 Travelcard holders are typically intensive travellers making around 20 trips a week. As a result, the Zone 1-2 ticket at £22 per week provides a cost per ride of just over £1. This is broadly in line with the rates most Travelcard users pay and is substantially less than the Tube pay as you go fare per journey. Congestion Charge Question No: 221 / 2006 Tony Arbour Would the Mayor outline what provision for payment of the Congestion Tax is available to law abiding people who do not usually drive in to London but find themselves unexpectedly having to make a car journey into central London and then being detained after midnight? I agree that Congestion Charging scheme could be improved to allow customers to pay the charge after midnight on the day of travel. To this end, I confirmed in September last year that the introduction of a ‘pay next day’ facility would be introduced in September 2006. The charge will be £8 up to midnight on the day of travel and £10 up to midnight on the day after travel. TfL intend that the introduction of pay next day be brought forward to this June and they are consulting on this variation. Buses Question No: 222 / 2006 Tony Arbour What is the longest permitted time that a bus driver may leave his engine running at a bus stand? Does this apply to all hours of the day? Does this apply to buses at Kew Retail Park? What action is taken by TfL to ensure that drivers abide by the rules? What action is taken by TfL against drivers who flout the rules? Operators are contractually required to ensure that bus drivers keep their engines switched off at all bus stands and at all times of the day and night. TfL is very much aware of its responsibilities as a good neighbour in this respect, and carefully investigates any complaint of this nature. TfL carries out ad – hoc and targeted monitoring of bus stands to identify any drivers not respecting the rules. TfL also provide signage at bus stands to remind drivers to switch off engines and has recently issued a poster to all bus garages to emphasise to drivers the importance of complying. If a driver is reported leaving an engine running, by an official or a member of the public, TfL would expect the operator to take action to ensure the driver does not break the rules again. Thames Gateway Development Question No: 223 / 2006 Tony Arbour What action is the Mayor taking to ensure that the Thames Gateway Development meets its 2016 target of 120,000 homes? The target of 12,000 homes is the ODPM target for the whole of the Thames Gateway; the corresponding target for the London section of the Gateway is 60,000. My strategic planning policies, as set out in the London Plan and the draft East London sub-regional development framework, are designed to ensure that appropriate sites are identified and bought forward for housing development. The GLA Housing Capacity study also sets out potential for future housing growth in the area between 2004 and 2027. My officers provide policy and practical support to help bring forward housing development e.g. the Architecture and Urbanism Unit and Planning Decisions Unit provide design advice and guidance for major planning applications; and the LDA is actively involved in bringing forward development sites and skills training. Through the London Thames Gateway Steering Group, my officers meet other key partners concerned with housing to identify priorities and address barriers to delivery. Thames Gateway Question No: 224 / 2006 Tony Arbour What action is the Mayor taking to ensure that the Thames Gateway does not become another soulless dormitory town? Significant new developments in the London Thames Gateway must be about more than just providing houses from which residents commute to work and play elsewhere: they must also make provision for job opportunities, good transport links, high quality schools and hospitals, shops, parks and open spaces, i.e. all the factors that contribute to creating sustainable communities. My officers work with a range of key partners through the London Thames Gateway Steering Group to ensure that this approach is applied to policy and other development. My strategic planning policies as set out in the London Plan and supplementary planning guidance make clear that sustainable communities are the long term goal, and I will direct refusal for any developments which do not reach acceptable standards. London Plan Review Question No: 225 / 2006 Tony Arbour In your report Reviewing the London Plan, you state in your foreword, “On the issue of climate change I am determined to bring forward radical changes to policy” you further state in Part 3 - Key Areas for review you make climate change you state “ This will be one of the most important and extensive areas of policy development in the Review and a new over-arching policy on Climate Change will be included”. Would it not be more appropriate to be focusing on issues such as affordable housing and do you not think that placing such emphasis on this issue will put developers off house building? The Statement of Intent says that it is a priority for stronger policies on climate change to be included in the plan. It also says that the London Plan affordable housing targets will be reviewed. This will not put off housing development, but as with all planning matters a balance needs to be struck between objectives. Meeting with Diane Abbott Question No: 226 / 2006 Bob Neill When was your meeting with Diane Abbott scheduled and what was its purpose? My meeting on 1 December with Diane Abbott MP was scheduled some weeks ahead of it taking place and the purpose was to discuss the London Schools and the Black Child conference and the implications of the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games for Hackney. Lesbian and Gay Museum Project Question No: 227 / 2006 Bob Neill In your 25 January Assembly MQT: Mayor’s Report you state: “I have agreed that the provision carried forward for the Lesbian and Gay Museum Project (£24,000) is returned to the General Fund Reserve.” Why has this occurred? Has the Museum project collapsed or is there another reason? I support the proposal to develop a lesbian and gay museum, which is being progressed by an independent trust with charitable status. Money was earmarked for an independent feasibility report. It was agreed with the organisers via meetings with them, that this research was not needed as they had already carried out most of this work. Therefore the GLA feasibility study was not commissioned. The budget allocated was therefore not required. Adult Education, Bromley Question No: 228 / 2006 Bob Neill Is the Mayor aware of the recent changes to government funding for adult education, which risk placing this valuable service beyond the reach of a great many Londoners, such as my own constituents in the London Borough of Bromley, where Council Officers predict rising fees, diminishing concessions and dwindling choices for adult learners? Will the Mayor join me in condemning cuts in adult education and call on the government to rethink this harmful approach? I am aware of the cuts to adult education that you refer to and the implications that this has for Londoners. This is why I am seeking further powers over the skills budgets for London which are currently unaccountable to London and do not reflect the needs of the communities that they are supposed to serve. I look forward to the Assembly Member writing to ODPM in support of my proposals in the London Powers debate. Cost of RMT Strike Question No: 229 / 2006 Bob Neill What was the cost to London’s economy of the latest RMT industrial action? The industrial action had little or no impact on LU services. All LU lines ran a mostly good service during the period (except Northern line on one Monday). The strikes at New Year and on the 8/9 January only served to inconvenience Londoners. Although passenger numbers on the Underground were slightly down, there is no evidence to suggest that this has had a significant effect on London's economy. I am pleased that London Underground will proceed with the implementation of the shorter working week for all station staff on February 5, as planned. This is a fair deal and ensures safe staffing levels at all London Underground stations Number of RMT Members on Strike Question No: 230 / 2006 Bob Neill How many RMT members came out on strike on 31 December 2005/1 January 2006 and 8/9 January 2006 respectively? 31 December 2005/1 January 2006 877 8/9 January 2006 1016 This represented 15% and 19% of LU station staff respectively. London Underground (LU) employees are not obliged to disclose their union membership, hence the assumption that all staff who took part in the industrial action were RMT members and not from any other trades union. Safer Neighbourhood Teams Members Question No: 231 / 2006 Bob Neill Will the Mayor confirm that all existing Safer Neighbourhood Teams will remain at 6 members throughout the proposed accelerate roll-out to the remaining wards in London? Yes. The MPS has confirmed they have no intention to transfer resources from existing Safer Neighbourhood Teams. Cost of New Year’s Eve 2005 Celebrations Question No: 232 / 2006 Bob Neill What was the cost of the New Year’s Eve celebrations to the GLA and/or the functional bodies and from which budget heads was this met? The total cost of staging the New Years Eve fireworks display was £1.1million. Of this £1 million was funded by the LDA from its tourism budget and £100,000 from the GLA’s Events budget Cost of China in London 2006 Question No: 233 / 2006 Bob Neill What is the estimated cost of China in London 2006 to GLA and functional bodies’ funds and from which budget heads will this be met? China in London 2006 will be the largest celebration of Chinese culture in the capital. It will run between late January and the end of March, and will include over 100 events and activities across all parts of London. In addition to its role in London itself the annual Chinese New Year celebration in London has been significantly expanded this year. The aim of this is to promote London in China itself through Chinese media coverage of events in London. The current estimated cost is £400-450k (exclusive of VAT). Of this £40,000 has been allocated from the GLA Events for London budget and £25,000 has been allocated to he Shanghai on Screen festival from the London Development Agency. The remaining costs will be met through the London Unlimited programme for the international promotion of London run from Visit London and funded by the LDA. This programme of events will celebrate the contribution to London’s success and vibrancy made by the capitals Chinese communities as well as supporting delivery of the priority set out in the EDS to ensure London is appropriately placed with regard to key emerging markets. Cost of Russian Winter Festival Question No: 234 / 2006 Bob Neill What was the cost to the GLA and/or the functional bodies of the Russian Winter Festival and from which budget heads was this met? The Russian Winter Festival secured two days of all-day news coverage of London on Russian television – achieving important promotion London in a key emerging market. The Festival was attended by over 73,000 people. The budget was met as follows: - £20,000 from the budget of the Strategic Project and Policy Evaluation team in the Mayor’s Office Economic and Business Policy Directorate - £96,359 from London Unlimited programme run from Visit London and funded by the London Development Agency. London Unlimited’s mission is to create economic benefit for London by strategically promoting London as an international destination, across a range of sectors, to multiple audiences. This event supports delivery of the priority set out in the Economic Development Strategy ensuring London us appropriately placed with regards to key emerging markets. Cost of Peace Reception, 7 December 2006 Question No: 235 / 2006 Bob Neill What was the cost of the Peace Reception on 7 December 2005 and from what budget head was this met? The cost of the Peace Reception on 7 December 2005 was £6569. The budget was met from the International Team. Invitation List for December 2005 Peace Reception Question No: 236 / 2006 Bob Neill Will the Mayor provide a full list of organisations and individuals invited to the Peace Reception on 7 December 2005? Organisations that participated in the Peace Reception held on 7 December 2005 were the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (“CND”) and the Stop the War campaign (“STW”). The list of invited individuals was pulled together from the databases of each of these organisations. In addition, some individuals with a known interest in this area whose details are held by the GLA were also invited. The list of individuals identifies some members and supporters of CND and STW, as well as some individuals with an interest in this area whose details are held by the GLA. Guests at the event included key London stakeholders including parliamentary representatives, business groups, trade unions and celebrities who are supportive of peace initiatives The views of the organisations listed above on disclosure of the identity of invited individuals were sought (in response to a request by a member of the public), and one organisation indicated that it was not happy for the names of its members in attendance at the reception to be disclosed. Accordingly, whilst I am more than happy to disclose the identity of the organisations involved (as above), I am withholding the information as to the identity of individuals, in reliance on the exemption contained in section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. I am treating the information as exempt under s40(2)(b) of the Act, in that condition (a) of section 40(3) is met, in that publication would be a breach of the Data Protection Principles (1 and/or 2) and in some cases, section 10 of the Data Protection Act 1998. London Waterways Commission Question No: 237 / 2006 Bob Neill Will the Mayor provide full details of the proposed membership, terms of reference, budget and administrative arrangements for the London Waterways Commission? As stated in question 128 the London Waterway s Commission does not have an annual budget, rather it will have to bid for funds for any projects it wishes to promote, these bids may be made to the GLA or other organisations and will have to compete for resources. Administrative support for the Commission will be provided by officers in the GLA Policy and Partnership Directorate and by TfL, and thus will include such expenses as mail outs and booking/refreshments at meetings. Full details can be obtained from Kevin Reid in Policy & Partnerships, ext.4991. Funds Provided to Opponents of the Thames Gateway Bridge Question No: 238 / 2006 Bob Neill Will the Mayor provide a full breakdown of how the £50,000 allocated to opponents of the Thames Gateway Bridge was spent and how, and by whom, was the expenditure authorised? Darren Johnson wrote to TfL advising that he would engage specialist firms for the objectors, manage relationships with the consultants and take responsibility for satisfactory completion of their work. On this assurance TfL agreed that the invoices would be authorised for payment by the TGB project team when confirmation of receipt and acceptance of the reports was received from Mr Johnson. The fund for opponents’ consultants was allocated as follows: £10,000 to Phil Goodwin for analysis of the traffic model £2,000 to John Elliot for analysis of whether a serious assessment was made of the local need for access to services and jobs through sustainable forms of transport £9,200 to Riki Therivel , and £5,000 to John Whitelegg for consideration of employment and economic impacts of the TGB £5,500 to Keith Buchan for a study of the national and regional policy context £6,000 to Kerry Hamilton for a critique of the TGB Consultation Report £10,000 to Mark McCarthy for consideration of the health impacts of TGB £2,200 to Philip Connelly for analysis of environmental issues Meeting with Minister for London on 20 December 2005 Question No: 239 / 2006 Bob Neill What was discussed at your meeting with the Minister for London on 20 December 2005? I had a very constructive meeting with the Minister for London Jim Fitzpatrick MP on 20 December 2005. They discussed the Government’s review of the GLA’s powers, the London Plan, tall buildings, Thames Gateway, London weighting, review of Fire and Rescue Service firefighter targets, London Olympics 2012, and the Notting Hill Carnival. Meeting with Ambassador of the Russian Federation Question No: 240 / 2006 Bob Neill What was discussed at your meeting with the Ambassador of the Russian Federation on 3 January 2006? The meeting between me and Yury Fedotov, Ambassador of the Russian Federation on 3rd January was primarily set up as an introductory meeting to meet the new Russian Ambassador. At the meeting other topics of discussion included the increasing importance of London as a centre for Russian business and the Russian Winter Festival. Commercial Boatyard Facilities on the Tidal Thames Question No: 241 / 2006 Bob Neill Have the Mayor and/or the LDA responded to the report on Commercial Boatyard Facilities on the tidal Thames by City Cruises plc, published in May 2005? Does the Mayor agree with the report’s conclusion that there is a serious lack of such facilities? What steps will he take to address this situation? I have not sent a formal response to this report although it was brought to my attention last year by John Biggs AM. It raises an important set of issues and I have asked my officers to investigate further. I expect the new London Waterways Commission will also want to explore the provision of boatyard facilities in London and the opportunities they could offer for local skilled employment. The London Plan has a specific policy (4C.18) which protects and encourages such facilities. Indeed a new boatyard facility is being proposed in connection with a mixed use riverside development in Greenwich, albeit with some detailed matters to be resolved. Development of Cruise Liner Terminal in London Question No: 242 / 2006 Bob Neill What are the current proposals for the development of a cruise liner terminal on the Thames within Greater London? What is the Mayor doing to pursue this issue? At present I am not aware of any current proposals for a Cruise Liner terminal in London. There have been proposals in the Greenwich area and there is demand for visiting ships to approach and pass through Tower Bridge. However, the size of many cruise ships prevents this due to the length and beam of vessels and the height restriction through Tower Bridge. This is the sort of area where joint working between my officers, the Port of London Authority and Visit Londonis useful. It could also be subject for investigation by the London Waterways Commission. The case for a Cruise Liner Terminal was examined in relation to development at Convoys Wharf but in the end it did not form part of the final development scheme. Marine Engineering on the Tidal Thames Question No: 243 / 2006 Bob Neill Does the Mayor support the establishment of a cluster of marine engineering/centre for marine excellence on the tidal Thames, as advocated by the City Cruises plc report on boatyard facilities? What steps has he taken, or does he prepare to take to support the creation of such a facility? The concept of a marine centre of excellence is an interesting one that warrants further investigation. The advice from City Cruises is that such a centre would be beneficial. I have asked my officers in the LDA, TfL and GLA to explore this proposal over the course of the next year. This would be a useful area for the London Waterways Commission to investigate. Boat Servicing Centre, Canary Wharf Question No: 244 / 2006 Bob Neill Is the Mayor aware that the “boat servicing centre” proposed as part of the Canary Wharf redevelopment is in fact too small for 90% of commercial vessels operating on the Thames? What steps will he take to rectify this? I believe that you are referring to the facilities proposed at Convoys Wharf. If this is the case then I am aware that this is the position reported in the City Cruises report. I have seen the Convoys Wharf proposals and broadly endorsed them as being in line with my London Plan policies at the time the planning application was submitted. The detailed requirements of the boatyard are a matter for the local planning authority. I would expect the developer to have researched the requirements of what they are building and built a facility that will be economically viable. Policy 4C.18 of my London Plan seeks the retention of waterway support facilities and encourages the provision of new facilities. Jubilee Line Shutdown Question No: 245 / 2006 Roger Evans What is the Mayor’s assessment of the Jubilee Line shutdown at Christmas? Does he congratulate Tublelines on their efficient work? The extra carriage on every single Jubilee line train means that an extra 6,000 passengers can be carried every morning and evening peak. I would like to congratulate the entire project team, including Tube Lines, on working to deliver the improvements successfully two days early. New York City Transit Workers Strike Question No: 246 / 2006 Roger Evans What lessons has the Mayor learnt from the New York City transit workers strike? I do not believe that the circumstances and legal frameworks in New York are sufficiently similar to allow useful conclusions to be drawn. New Year’s Eve Free Travel Question No: 247 / 2006 Roger Evans What was the nature of the National Westminster Bank sponsorship deal for free travel on New Years Eve? Was the original agreement affected by the strike? Can the Mayor provide the financial figures for the deal? The sponsorship package with NatWest for New Years Eve (NYE) involved an amount of commercial and London Underground poster space (specifying free travel times) along with a leaflet promoting NYE services. The agreement was not affected by the strike action on NYE. LU is unable to provide financial information at the present time, as this may affect future sponsorship activities. Industrial Relations Question No: 248 / 2006 Roger Evans Will the Mayor comment on the current industrial relations climate? Last year, London Underground (LU) agreed a two-year wage settlement with the trade unions. That agreement produced a period of calm with regard to industrial action. This shows the value of multi-year labour agreements, which we shall insist on, going forward. These agreements require both management and labour to follow established machinery of negotiations and to live up to the agreements that are reached. The fundamental point for me, is that any strike action, prior to the exhaustion of the machinery of negotiations will never be rewarded. Woolwich Crossrail Station Question No: 249 / 2006 Roger Evans What is the Mayor’s opinion on the campaign for a Crossrail station in Woolwich? The Docklands Light Railway Woolwich extension and Greenwich Waterfront Transit will bring early transport improvements to Woolwich. Clearly there would be real benefits from a Crossrail station at Woolwich, but given the high additional costs the focus is on providing the current, costed scheme. I have discussed this issue with the local Assembly Member, Len Duvall and am aware of the strong campaign in Woolwich to support the case for a Crossrail station. As you know, powers to construct a station at Woolwich are not being sought in the Bill introduced into Parliament on 22 February 2005, although the alignment of the running tunnels does not preclude a station at Woolwich being developed in the future. The Crossrail team, at the request of the London Borough of Greenwich and other stakeholders, have undertaken a more detailed study of the costs and benefits of a station at Woolwich, which was published in December 2005. This study assessed the case for the station against the Government's integrated transport criteria for new rail schemes and includes a cost benefit analysis. Having considered the report, I am told that Ministers remain of the view that there is not a strong enough case for building a station at Woolwich in view of the cost of doing so. However, as mentioned below, the Crossrail Bill Select Committee sessions commenced on 17 January 2006, where petitions are being heard, including that from Greenwich Council and no final decision has yet been made. Crossrail Question No: 250 / 2006 Roger Evans Is Crossrail ever going to happen? I am confident it will, and the significant Government funding to Crossrail for the Parliamentary process and sponsorship of the Bill confirms their continuing support. The project is proceeding as fast as the necessary procedures will allow. The Crossrail Bill Select Committee sessions commenced on 17 January 2006, where petitions are being heard. An Act of Parliament is required for the construction of any new railway line, and construction cannot commence until the Bill is enacted. A project of this scale requires detailed planning, and full inclusion and consultation with stakeholders in both the public and private sectors. CLRL carried out extensive public and stakeholder consultation prior to the submission of the Bill and will continue this throughout the Parliamentary process, detailed design and construction phases. North London Line Question No: 251 / 2006 Roger Evans Is the Mayor confident of taking control of the North London Line? Yes. TfL are in the process of concluding negotiations with the DfT on the terms of responsibility for the whole of the Silverlink Metro franchise, including the North London Line. There have been detailed financial negotiations to ensure that the terms of transfer are in the interests of London and will not represent an undue cost burden. I am confident that the transfer will be concluded in the very near future. Discounted Fares Question No: 252 / 2006 Roger Evans Are there lessons to be learnt from the discounted fares scheme being operated by Virgin CrossCountry to benefit passengers on RMT strike days? TfL is currently working with its private sector partner to make it easier to introduce special Oyster fares when services are disrupted or in their aftermath. It is expected that this capability will be introduced during the course of 2006.* Northern Line Question No: 253 / 2006 Brian Coleman Can you please provide figures for excess journey time for the Northern Line, in proportional percentage due to: A - Infraco action, B - London Underground action, and C - other /passenger action, for the months of November and December 2005? London Underground (LU) compiles its performance statistics on a 4-week period rather than calendar months. The breakdown of excess journey time figures for the two most recent periods (covering 13 November to 7 January) shows that the total excess journey time of 7 minutes on the Northern line is made up of 2 minutes due to stations-related functions, for example interchange and ticket purchase etc; and 5 minutes due to trains-related incidents. The trains excess journey time is broken down as follows: 3.5 minutes Small incidents of less than 2 minutes duration each (eg fluctuations in demand, variations in service regularity) 0.8 minutes Infrastructure (fleet, signals, track) 0.4 minutes LU-related (including staff absence, errors and industrial action) 0.3 minutes Customer related (eg security alerts or customer illness) Signal Failure Northern Line Question No: 254 / 2006 Brian Coleman How many signal failures and multiple signal failures there have been on the Northern Line during the months of November and December 2005? LU compiles its performance statistics on a 4-week period rather than calendar months. The figures for the two most recent periods are: Period Dates Number of Failures 8 16 October – 12 November 28 9 13 November – 10 December 50 The figures indicate the number of signal failures that were attributable to Infracos and that resulted in service disruptions of 2 minutes or more. A single incident that causes more than one signal to fail is counted as 1 in the table. Tube Driver Establishment Question No: 255 / 2006 Brian Coleman Can you please provide figures for the budgeted tube driver establishment, and figures for the in-post number of drivers on the Northern Line, as of 31st December 2005? The budget was 540, against which the in-post number was 535. Archway Station Question No: 256 / 2006 Brian Coleman How many of the 252 trains that prematurely terminated at Archway were due to Infraco action, how many were due to London Underground action and how many were due to other factors? Over 300 trains are scheduled through Archway each weekday – this number of reversals represents approximately 3% of trains over a month. The Northern line’s geography means that recovery of schedule occurs more often at the north ends of the line. It is not feasible to establish the reasons for reversing individual trains and whether they were due to infraco action or LU action.. However, the month in question (October 2005) was a time of extensive disruption due to infrastructure problems – particularly related to a series of secondary braking system (tripcock) defects. Croydon Police Station Question No: 257 / 2006 Andrew Pelling My GLA constituent has found it necessary to complain on a number of occasions about the continuing delay in sorting out the access of Police vehicles to Croydon Police Station. The normal access on Beech House Road is out of action. Instead cars now use the fire exit in Friends Road. Is there insufficient money to repair the gate on Beech House Road? When will Beech House Road become the main entrance for vehicles once more? I have been informed that the MPS’ Property Services have raised the money for a replacement gate. The preparatory work commenced just before Christmas and the gates, being manufactured in Germany, will be delivered at the beginning of February. The programmed works are due to be completed on 10th February 2006. Bus Capacity Question No: 258 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Transport for London and Croydon LEA give the appearance to my constituents to be passing the buck between each other on providing sufficient bus capacity to serve both commuters from the densely populated Davidson Road area and pupils travelling to the temporary site of the Stanley Tech High School. Please could I ask you to intervene urgently to provide extra capacity on the route between Norwood Junction and East Croydon between 7.45 and 8.30am weekdays. In response to the relocation of this school, TfL has introduced a new school day only service (route 604). This service was revised, in consultation with the school, following initial experience of usage. Subsequent to this, surveys were organised to assess whether capacity on local route 410 was adequate for the demand. TfL found that this was the case. The surveys showed that there was adequate capacity at Tennison Road towards Croydon in the morning peak hour, although 1 bus out of the 6 was full. TfL will continue to monitor the situation. 463 Bus Route Question No: 259 / 2006 Andrew Pelling You will be aware of the protests that took place about crowding on the 463 bus route in the morning. What can be done to improve the peak capacity of this service. Once TfL was aware of this problem they quickly examined ways of providing extra capacity to meet the increased demand. On 9 January 2006, an extra bus northbound in the morning and southbound in the afternoon, timed to meet the peak school demand, was introduced. PCSOs Question No: 260 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Since the inception of PCSOs how many individuals have been employed as PCSOs by the MPS? How many of these individuals have become Police Officers? Police Community Support Officers were introduced to London on 11th September 2002. Since then 2,819 have been recruited, of whom 280 have subsequently become police officers. Pension Scheme Question No: 261 / 2006 Andrew Pelling What action can you take as Mayor to ask the MPA to put pressure on the Government Actuary’s Department to certify the pension scheme of TUPE transferred employees under notice of redundancy at Scott Wilson who previously were members of the Principal Civil Service Pension Service Scheme as employees of the MPS? I have been informed that the MPA's understanding is that the Government Actuary's Department (GAD) is unable to issue a Certificate if they have not been provided with documentation to show that the proposed benefit structure passes the Broad Comparability Assessment. The GAD has been in correspondence with Scott Wilson's current pension advisers to seek the outstanding documentation. Coulsdon By-pass Question No: 262 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Is there an over run in the completion date of the Coulsdon by-pass? Are there any cost over runs for the public purse? The original completion date for the Coulsdon Relief Road was 26 January 2006. A combination of unforeseen ground conditions at Smitham Station and additional diversion work has resulted in delays to key elements of the project. TfL’s contract makes provision for the review and assessment of delays, and the contractor being awarded an extension of time. The scheme is now scheduled to complete in autumn 2006. Allowance was made for risks to the project and provisions made. However, the delays encountered are likely to result in overall project costs in excess of the previous provisions. TfL’s project team is reviewing the extent of residual risk with the designer and contractor, and risk provisions will be updated once this work is complete. London Underground PPP Question No: 263 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Would you be willing to see the taxpayer pay anything for changing the LU PPP contracts from output based to input based contracts? My position has already been well documented that the PPP was an expensive and inefficient method of securing the necessary investment for the London Underground. The contracts however are now in place and LU is working hard to maximise the outputs from the Infracos to achieve the improved performance of the Underground. Although the Periodic Review in 2010 might allow us to amend some of the contract terms, there would be risks and costs attached to this. My and LU’s primary objective for the Review will be to hold the Infracos to their commitments, and extract maximum value from the contracts for its customers and the taxpayer. Drug Abuse Question No: 264 / 2006 Andrew Pelling What can be done to tackle drug dealing near and around tram stops in South Norwood and Woodside? The British Transport Police (BTP) have confirmed that since two minor drug related incidents at the Arena tram stop in Croydon in early 2005, they are not aware of any further problems of this nature. I am continuing to work with the BTP and MPS to make train stations and tram stops in London safer. The BTP and local Safer Neighbourhood teams regularly patrol transport interchanges in the Croydon area and are making a real difference to crime and the fear of crime. Additionally, any information from the public to assist police to combat drug dealing is vital. By working together, drug dealing in Croydon can be greatly reduced. Community Support Officers Question No: 265 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Will Community Support Officers be permitted to police streets in ways that do not require them to police specifically in groups? Decisions on solo or double patrolling are a matter for Borough Operational Command Units (BOCU's) in light of local risk assessments. In most boroughs, experienced PCSOs do patrol on their own. Battle of Britain Heritage Question No: 266 / 2006 Andrew Pelling What consideration can be given to “Battle of Britain” heritage issues if a planning application should come forward at the former officers’ mess site at Kenley aerodrome? Planning Policy Guidance 15: ‘Planning and the Historic Environment’, provides a full statement of Government policies for the identification and protection of historic buildings, conservation areas, and other elements of the historic environment. It explains the role played by the planning system in their protection. Whilst the majority of the airfield is within the London Borough of Croydon, the former officers’ mess is outside of the borough boundary, and hence outside of Greater London. I would therefore have no role in any planning applications submitted for the former officers’ mess. Oystercard and Pre-pay Facilities Question No: 267 / 2006 Andrew Pelling What is the average sum of unspent money held by TfL on Oyster and other pre-pay facilities? As of Tuesday, 17 January, 2006, there was £12,572,049 unspent on 1,723,645 Oyster cards. This represents an average card balance of £7.29 per card. Olympics Question No: 268 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Would you support darts being an Olympic in 2012? The decision on which sports are included in the Olympic Games is one solely for the IOC. Anti-Terrorism Funding Question No: 269 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Could you outline the conversations that have taken place with HM Treasury regarding the appropriate funding for anti-terrorism work by the MPS? The MPS and MPA have not held conversations with HM Treasury, although they have held detailed negotiations with the Home Office and a full business case has been submitted. Although some final detail is still awaited, the headline allocations indicate that this should be a good settlement for counter terrorism funding. The Home Office has confirmed counter terrorism grants covering existing activity of some £177m and that a further £50m will also be incorporated. There is also a new grant of £30m in 2006-07 rising to £45m in 2007-08 in relation to the bid for extra resources. This will give a total allocation of some £257m in 2006-07 compared to the £228m that has been budgeted for so far. In addition the MPS will expect an allocation from new capital grant funding of £30m nationally, although allocations have yet to be announced. Buses Question No: 270 / 2006 Andrew Pelling Since TfL’s creation how many buses have been found to be in contravention of yellow boxes in London and what has been the amount of fines received? Camera enforcement of yellow-box junctions commenced in July 2004. The total number of buses contravening yellow boxes on the Transport for London Road Network and issued with Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) since then is 433, out of a total of 70,000 issued to all vehicles over the same period. Based on the value recovered per PCN, some £26,290 has been received for bus contraventions. Such PCNs are paid for by the operator concerned as the owner is liable for payment. H Forman and Son Question No: 271 / 2006 Angie Bray The smoked salmon company H Forman & Son has identified a piece of vacant land in LB Tower Hamlets, which is approximately 1 mile from its existing premises. The land has sat derelict for 7 years and is owned by the Borough. Mr Forman has asked the Borough whether it will sell him part or all of the site so that he can relocate his business. He is advised that his plan would not contravene the Borough’s Area Action Plan for the site. However, the Cabinet have decided that rather than help him to relocate by selling part or all of this site at market value, they are not prepared to consider selling it until further master planning is undertaken, which would be too late for Forman’s. The site previously had planning permission for a mixed use scheme with Mayoral approval. Locating Forman’s to this site would solve their Olympic difficulties, create local employment in one of the worst areas in the country, meet the objectives of the Mayor’s Food Strategy for London especially in encouraging food tourism and reducing food miles. Forman’s proposed relocation to this site is fully supported by London Thames Gateway Development Corporation. Does the Mayor consider that LBTH’s refusal to make this site available to Forman’s business is unreasonable and will he press LBTH to make the site available to Forman’s? I understand that H Forman have had discussions with LB Tower Hamlets which have made clear their planning reasons for not making the site available. The London Development Agency continues to be in close negotiations with Mr Forman and his advisors in order to find an alternative relocation site and I hope these will lead to a successful outcome. Olympic Land Purchase Question No: 272 / 2006 Angie Bray In the past Mary Reilly has been quoted as saying costs for buying and preparing the site for the Olympics could “in a worse case scenario” top £1billion pounds. In your “Draft capital spending plan for 2006-7” - p7 - it shows that the LDA intends to spend £245m in 06/07, £439m in 07/08 and 75m in 08/09 on “Olympic Land and Legacy”. This totals £768m. Given that the initial estimates for these costs was below half a billion, is this new figure robust? Are you alarmed by the speed with which these costs are moving towards the “worst case scenario” figure? The capital spending plan figures are completely in line with the London Development Agency’s projections and the financial strategy was approved by the LDA board last year. Olympics - LDA Question No: 273 / 2006 Angie Bray In your “Draft capital spending plan for 2006-7” - p1 talks about the LDA’s role in purchasing land for the Olympic site and states: “This land acquisition programme needs Government approval and it is not known when this will be secured, or whether it would have any implications for borrowing limits across the GLA Group.” Are you not concerned that we do not know when government approval will be forthcoming? Could it delay things further? You may not know the exact implications on borrowing limits across the GLA Group but what are the potential implications? Could this impact TfL’s ability to borrow for major transport projects for example? More than 80% of the land required to deliver the Olympic Park is already under pubic control. I am therefore confident that the remaining land can be acquired either through private negotiation with land owners or through compulsory purchase order. As with any CPO, the final decision rests with Government and in this case with the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. This will follow a public inquiry scheduled for May 2006. I am confident that the timetable allows sufficient time for delivery of the CPO and the relocation of businesses by summer 2007. Kulture2Couture Question No: 274 / 2006 Angie Bray Were any GLA resources used to fund the Kulture2Couture event on 26th and 27th November 2005? If so, how much and from which budget did the funding come from? Kulture2Couture was established and organised as part of my Black History Season programme and is therefore met out of the annual Black History Month budget, which met the core costs of marketing and promotion across all the events. Additionally, sponsorship (cash and in-kind) was raised totalling £65k. Kulture2Couture took place over 4 days: Thursday 24 – Sunday 27 November 2005. Kulture2Couture Question No: 275 / 2006 Angie Bray Was sponsorship for the Kulture2Couture event on 26th and 27th November 2005 sought and if so, how much was forthcoming? Kulture2Couture took place over 4 days: Thursday 24 – Sunday 27 November 2005. Sponsorship (cash and in-kind) was raised totalling £65k. Kulture2Couture Question No: 276 / 2006 Angie Bray How many exhibitors took part in the Kulture2Couture event on 26th and 27th November 2005? Can you provide a list of the exhibitors? In total, 46 companies exhibited at Kulture2Couture event, which took place on 24-27 November 2005 (launch event on Thursday 24 November, manufacturers’ workshop on Friday 25 November 2005 and public open days on Saturday 26 and Sunday 27 November 2005). A list of exhibitors is attached as Appendix E. Over 3,000 people attended the event and 350 people attended the industry workshops. EU Resale Right Directive Question No: 277 / 2006 Angie Bray Would the Mayor agree to support the Assembly’s Economic Development, Culture Sport and Tourism Committee Report, which I led, that called for the governmnent to reverse it’s decision to the lower the threshold on which the Droit de Suite can be levied, from 3,000 euros to 1,000 euros, in an effort to protect business and artist alike from the possible negative impact of the New Droit de Suite Directive? Following extensive consultation on the implementation of the Artists’ Resale Right Directive in the UK, the Government concluded that if the threshold were lowered to €1,000, there would be considerable benefit to artists on low incomes, while the cost to business related to processing royalties would be minimal and there would be no risk of diverting business away from London. This conclusion seems reasonable. However, as the Directive will be reviewed in 2009, there will be an opportunity to assess the impact of the level of the threshold on artists and the art market and if necessary to propose changes. Droit de Suite Question No: 278 / 2006 Angie Bray Does the Mayor support the recommendation of the Assembly’s EDCST committee that the UK should seek to keep it derogation on the Droit de Suite applying to dead artists after the set period of 2012? As I suggested in my answer to Question 2447/2005, the Artists’ Resale Right Directive is only just about to enter into force, so its impact is not yet known. When the Directive is reviewed in 2009, it will be important that the impact on artists and on the art market is examined carefully. Whether the provisions of the Directive, including the derogation relating to the work of deceased artists, need to be maintained or changed will depend on the outcome of that review. London Art Market Question No: 279 / 2006 Angie Bray Would the Mayor agree to facilitate the setting up of a London wide celebration of London’s Art market and artists to promote this aspect of our city commerce and culture, which we particularly excel at? A large number of festivals and events already exist in the capital to celebrate and promote the arts sector. Most notably the Frieze Art Fare, which in the few years since its inception has established a global reputation (last year 47,000 people attended). I support the Frieze Art Fare through the LDA Creative London department and through the Culture department at the GLA. I do not see the need to set up a new art and art market festival. Metropolitan Police Question No: 280 / 2006 Brian Coleman What is the estimated cost to the Metropolitan Police of the investigation of the complaint following Sir Iqbal Sacranie’s interview on Radio 4? Does the Mayor think this investigation is a proper use of London’s Police resources? The Metropolitan Police received a report of comments made by Sir Iqbal Sacranie during a radio interview which were investigated to ascertain if any offences were committed. I have been informed that three hours of a sergeant’s time was used, equating to roughly £21 an hour, making a cost of £63. Cycle Lanes Question No: 281 / 2006 Brian Coleman Can you confirm that Barnet Council’s response to TfL’s formal objection, referred to in your answer to question 2391/2005 (Removal of cycle lanes in Barnet), explained that a key reason for removing the cycle lanes was that they did not comply with TfL’s London Cycle Design Standards, and safe and adequate facilities could not be re-provided in this location? In the Council’s response to TfL’s formal objection, Barnet gave a number of reasons, including non-compliance in their view, with London Cycling Design Standards. It is a matter of professional judgment, based on experience and research, whether a facility makes cycling safer and more convenient. In this case, the opinion of TfL officers differs from that of Barnet officers. Whilst the existing facilities did not meet the guideline minimum widths for new cycle lanes detailed in the London Cycle Design Standards, they were considered, by officers in TfL’s Cycling Centre of Excellence, to be preferable to no facilities at all. An independent study by TRL in 2005, for TfL, into the development and delivery of measures designed to improve safety and convenience for cyclists found that “cycle lanes generally have the effect of decreasing the number of casualty collisions involving cyclists, despite not meeting the minimum or recommended guidance for cycle lane width”. Resurfacing Work on the A1000 and A1003 Question No: 282 / 2006 Brian Coleman Are you happy that vital resurfacing work on the A1000 and A1003, and improvements to reduce congestion, have been delayed by TfL’s refusal to fund schemes unless sub-standard cycle facilities are retained? It is a misrepresentation to say that TfL has delayed resurfacing work. TfL has put forward a course of action that would enable resurfacing works on A1000 / 1003 to continue. In respect of the A1000, TfL requested LB Barnet to initiate a ‘CRISP’ (Cycle Route Implementation Stakeholder Plan) study for this section of the LCN+ network to inform how best to provide for cyclists, whilst accommodating the needs of other road users. Barnet has yet to agree to this request. In respect of the A1003, TfL has requested plans of the proposed re-design of the road layout to determine the potential impacts of the scheme on the safety and convenience of cyclists and other road users. TfL is awaiting these plans. A1003 Question No: 283 / 2006 Brian Coleman Are you aware that during a site visit to the A1003, TfL witnessed a cyclist going the wrong way round a busy roundabout (marked with potentially confusing cycle lanes in green coloured surfacing) but still consider the facility should remain as existing? Cyclists sometimes undertake illegal maneuvers, particularly using footways and short cuts. However, they do not have a monopoly on such antisocial and potentially unsafe practices. Officers from TfL’s Cycling Centre of Excellence (CCE) have undertaken a site visit and remain of the opinion that it is safer to retain the present cycle facilities than for them to be removed. Their removal and other changes to the roundabout proposed by Barnet would, in the opinion of CCE, significantly worsen conditions for cyclists. There are undoubtedly improvements that could be made and CCE has offered to review plans for a revised layout and otherwise assist in developing a more satisfactory design that achieved an appropriate balance of provision for all modes, and to trial and monitor an agreed interim proposal. A1003 Question No: 284 / 2006 Brian Coleman Do TfL’s representations regarding the A1003 roundabout contradict the recommendation in paragraph 5.4.14 of the London Cycle Design Standards? No. The caveat on cycle lanes on roundabouts appearing in section 5.4.14 of the London Cycle Design Standards relates specifically to ‘Continental’ type roundabouts. These are measurably safer than standard UK design roundabouts, in that they reduce traffic speed to that of cyclists by narrowing the entry and exit points. They are uncommon in this country. Sections 5.4.4 and 5.4.9 set out the type of measures that can reduce the risks to cyclists at UK roundabouts. The key issue is to reduce the speed of traffic on entry, circulation and exit to a level consistent with use by cyclists. The A1003 roundabout orbital cycle lanes also lessen traffic speeds. Each location has its own risks and characteristics that need to be properly considered when developing designs. A1000 Question No: 285 / 2006 Brian Coleman Are you concerned that the cycle lanes on the A1000, which TfL officers would like retained, are as little as 1.0m wide, and can you confirm what the minimum width of cycle lane, as specified by the LCDS, should be for this situation? As mentioned in my response to question 283, TfL believe that the cycle lanes should be retained because their removal would significantly worsen conditions for cyclists. An independent study by TRL in 2005 into the development and delivery of measures to improve safety and convenience found that “cycle lanes generally have the effect of decreasing the number of casualty collisions involving cyclists, despite not meeting the minimum or recommended guidance for cycle lane width.” Of course, there would be additional benefits, where cycle lanes are of the recommended width i.e. 1.5-2.0m. London Cycle Design Standards Question No: 286 / 2006 Brian Coleman Will you instruct TfL to support the removal of substandard and/or illegal cycle measures where they are unsafe or cannot be amended to comply with legislation and the London Cycle Design Standards? I encourage boroughs to make London’s streets safer for everyone, and to work with TfL and neighbouring boroughs to provide improved conditions for cyclists, particularly on strategic routes. My priority is those cycle routes which together form the LCN+ and I have asked TfL to involve every London borough, agree common standards and procedures and co-ordinate delivery of this flagship programme. These requirements are set out in the London Cycling Design Standards. The first step is a feasibility study, the CRISP (Cycle Route Implementation Stakeholder Plan) where site problems are identified, and priorities and mitigating treatments are agreed for each route. If existing facilities do not meet the qualitive minimum widths for new cycle lanes TfL consider them to be preferable to no facilities at all. An independent study by TRL in 2005, for TfL, into the development and delivery of measures designed to improve safety and convenience for cyclists found that “cycle lanes generally have the effect of decreasing the number of casualty collisions involving cyclists, despite not meeting the minimum or recommended guidance for cycle lane width”. Where a measure is determined not to be legal, I would of course fully support TfL and a borough working together to resolve such a situation in a manner that did not prejudice my objectives for cycling in the capital. Cycle Facilities Question No: 287 / 2006 Brian Coleman Do the Mayor and TfL consider the retention of substandard cycle facilities to be more important than the safety of cyclists? In the case of Barnet’s works on the A1000 and A1003, TfL believes that it would be safer for cyclists if the cycle lanes to be retained than for Barnet to remove them. Henly’s Corner Question No: 288 / 2006 Brian Coleman Can you provide current details of work planned for Henly’s Corner? Henly’s Corner comprises three inter-connected junctions where the A1 joins and leaves the A406, with the A598 Regent’s Park Road crossing between. Studies were undertaken to seek to provide pedestrian crossing improvements at the A598 junction but these were found to be impractical without unduly affecting traffic operations at this important junction complex. TfL is now developing a scheme to seek to provide some improvements in pedestrian facilities within the junction complex as a whole. It is not proposed to carry out any road widening to achieve this. Detailed analysis of signalling options is in progress to seek to also improve traffic operations. Once complete, and with the support of local representatives, TfL would introduce the improvements in 2006/7, in conjunction with works to address the deteriorating surface of the carriageway. TfL is embarking on a strategic review of the A406 in Barnet to understand better the pressures and constraints, with a view to establishing a balanced longer-term plan that does not simply move and exacerbate the problem down the road. Waste Authority Levy Question No: 289 / 2006 Brian Coleman Are aware of DEFRA’s apparent reluctance to introduce the agreed tonnage based levy for waste authorities? Will you support such a levy? The Government have recently published a draft Statutory Instrument on the DEFRA website and it is intended that this is laid before Parliament imminently. Therefore contrary to your question DEFRA are not reluctant to introduce the tonnage based levy. As was stated by my officers in a response to the consultation : ‘It is considered that the current financial arrangements …are not fair, as they do not encourage waste collection authorities to reduce or recycle its household waste. Ideally a system whereby a waste collection authority pays for the amount of household waste that it delivers to the JWDA for disposal would be preferred. Where this is not possible it is considered that a levy based on tonnage delivered to a JWDA is the next best thing.’ I therefore support such a levy. Metropolitan Police Investigations Question No: 290 / 2006 Brian Coleman Can you confirm what resources, in terms of numbers of Officers and staff, the Metropolitan Police have dedicated to the investigation of possible Nazi war criminals still residing in the UK? I have been informed that a team has been deployed to investigate suspected Nazi war criminals residing in the UK and consists of a Senior Investigating Officer, an Investigating Officer, two Detective Sergeants (one Home Office Large Major Inquiry System - HOLMES), two Detective Constables (one HOLMES), one Police Analyst and one HOLMES Indexer. The team is dedicated to, but not exclusive to, this Operation. Royal Free Hospital Question No: 291 / 2006 Brian Coleman How many crimes have been committed within the grounds of the Royal Free Hospital in the London Borough of Camden in 2005? Can you break this down month and categorise it by offence? There were 270 offences recorded on the grounds of the Royal Free Hospital during 2005. The table below details a breakdown by month and by the type of offence. Affordable Housing Question No: 292 / 2006 Tony Arbour Do you have any concerns regarding the affordable housing in Fulham, which is priced at £400,000? If sold at this figure, it would be far beyond the affordable housing guidelines in my London Plan. My recent Supplementary Planning Guidance set the target range of income levels for which ‘intermediate housing’ should be affordable as being between £16,400 and £49,000 gross annual household income. My aim is to provide a range of housing options affordable to people across that income band. Under the SPG definition, to be affordable, the cost to buy must not exceed three and a half times the upper income limit. If renting, the total of all housing costs must not exceed 40 per cent of net household income. The maximum weekly cost, based on the £49,000 top of the income range, would therefore be £171,500 to buy or £285 per week to rent or part rent/part buy. Anything beyond this I would normally consider ordinary market housing. The fact that some boroughs are categorising such housing as affordable illustrates why the GLA’s strategic planning powers should be strengthened. Thames Gateway Question No: 293 / 2006 Tony Arbour Will you be making any response to the IPPR report on the Thames Gateway? Please refer to the answer to 120/2006* Thames Gateway Question No: 294 / 2006 Tony Arbour Do you share any of the concerns raised from the Institute for Public Policy Research on the Thames Gateway? Please refer to the answer 120/2006 Family Travelcards Question No: 295 / 2006 Roger Evans Why did you withdraw the Family Travelcard? I have launched many initiatives to benefit children and families over the last five years: the extension of free travel on bus to all under 16s; the free school party travel scheme; half price Travelcard seasons for 16/17s; and free bus travel for most 16/17s later this year. These initiatives are resulting in significant savings every day for large numbers of less well-off families across London. An adult and two children can now take an outing together for as little as £1.60 (2 80p Oyster fares). Last year the cost would have been twice this. The Family Travelcard provided discounted travel for both adults and children in a party. Two adults and 2 children could actually pay £4.00 less than two adults travelling alone. This meant that adults travelling alone could potentially make significant savings by claiming to have a non-existent child. TfL has now adopted a more consistent and transparent approach: adults simply buy standard off-peak Travelcards; any child accompanying an adult Travelcard holder (including the 1 million or so season ticket holders) can buy a 6 zone off-peak travel on the Tube and Trains for £1.00. This structure is simpler and more logical, but has led to a one-off increase in the cost of family leisure outings: a party of adults and children on the tube now pay £1.00p more per child than the same number of adults travelling alone. Family Travelcards Question No: 296 / 2006 Roger Evans What impact do you think scrapping these has had on London’s economy? Isn’t it counter-intuitive to scrap these cards at a time when visitor numbers to London have been falling? Doesn’t it also act as an incentive for families to drive in to London rather than take public transport? The package of changes introduced this January will make use of the Tube and bus more convenient for the majority of users. I do not consider that the withdrawal of the family Travelcard will have a negative effect on the London economy. Visitor numbers to London were increasing in the first half of 2005, blipped down in the July-September quarter, but are now recovering well. As far as traffic congestion in the off-peak and at weekends is concerned, the main issue is the growing level of car use in the suburbs and outer London. Free bus travel for children and the 80p adult Oyster fare provide families travelling in these areas with a new cost-effective alternative to the car. Two adults and two children can now travel by bus for as little as £1.60 (2 adult Oyster fares at 80p, children are free). A year ago, the cost would have been 50% more. Family Travelcards Question No: 297 / 2006 Roger Evans How many Family Travelcards were sold in 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005? How much fare revenue was obtained from family Travelcards in each of these years? What percentage of total fare revenue did family Travelcards make up in each of these years? What projections do TfL have for the impact this change will have on passenger behavior - do they expect families simply to pay the difference, or to swap to cars, or not to visit London at all? Please provide all figures or studies TfL have carried out on this issue. The table below sets out the statistics requested. London TfL from Percentage Family revenue of TfL Travelcard revenue issues of from individual Family tickets Travelcards Calendar m London All tickets year Family TCs £m £m 2001 9.5 12 1,815 0.7 2002 10.6 14 1,855 0.8 2003 10.4 14 1,872 0.7 2004 12.5 16 2,093 0.8 2004 12.0 16 2,200 0.7 TfL expects sales of One Day tickets to the Family Travelcard market to fall substantially. However, this loss of sales is expected to be more than offset by additional off-peak and weekend travel by families built around the new Oyster fare offers and the child Oyster card. These offers include: Child off-peak Oyster fares capped at £1; Low adult Oyster fares at weekends: the £2 maximum fare on the Tube in London has been frozen and the £2 fare from Zone 2 to Zone 1 reduced to £1.50; Oyster One Day caps set at 50p below the relevant off-peak Travelcard price; Half price pay as you go fares for 16/17s. Free travel for under 16’s on buses and trams. In addition, as mentioned under 0296/2006, two adults and two children can now make a trip together by bus for as little as £1.60 (2 adult Oyster fares at 80p, children travel free). A year ago, the cost would have been 50% more. Marshgate Lane Question No: 298 / 2006 Angie Bray In reference to the progress of negotiations with the businesses of Marshgate Lane, please could you clearly define what is meant by number of businesses engaged in dialogue with the LDA? Businesses categorised as being “engaged in dialogue with the LDA” have received an initial relocation proposal; a fee undertaking to meet the reasonable costs of legal advisors and surveyors of the businesses’ choice; and an initial indication of the market value of the property. These businesses have responded to the London Development Agency indicating their view of the relocation proposal and they have also either confirmed to the LDA that it holds accurate information about the business or provided relevant further information in order to inform the relocation and business support process. Violent Crime in Kensal Green Question No: 299 / 2006 Bob Blackman Do you think it is acceptable that violent crime in Kensal Green, the area where City lawyer Tom ap Rhys Pryce was brutally murdered, rose by 37% last year? The rise in violent crime is not acceptable and my condolences go to the family and friends of Thomas ap Rhys Pryce. I congratulate the MPS on their swift arrest of the suspects. I am committed to increasing police numbers and the growth of safer neighbourhood teams. Officers in Kensal Green will be concentrating activity in the local area to provide reassurance to the local community following this incident. With the full support of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), Government Office for London (GOL), Youth Justice Board (YJB), London Probation and many other crime reduction and prevention agencies I am committed to tackling violent crime in London. As a partnership we have established a Strategic Violent Crime Reduction Board to look at gun and knife-enabled crime. The focus of the board will be to establish a sound intelligence base of gangs, gun and knife use, develop and coordinate prevention best practice and to develop a pan-London approach to the prevention and reduction of knife enabled crime. Operation Blunt (MPS knife crime prevention and reduction programme) targets knife enabled crime in London. Some of the initiatives Officers are involved in include knife amnesties, multi-media education campaigns and community initiatives. I have worked with the From Boyhood to Manhood Foundation to develop a multi-media education resource to engage young people in discussion and learning about violence and anti-social behaviour. This resource is being delivered in schools across London. Kensal Green Murder Question No: 300 / 2006 Bob Blackman Is the death of Tom ap Rhys Pryce and the fact that last year there where more than 1200 crimes involving knives an argument for expanding stop and search. Knife enabled crime statistics provided by the MPA show that 12,173 offences were recorded during 2004/05. This is a -13% reduction on the 14,029 offences recorded during 2003/04. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) continually monitors the effectiveness of Stop and Search and continues to explore ways to make stop and search more effective, by utilising more accurate descriptions of those who have committed crime, by targeting known prolific and other priority offenders and by giving officers better guidance on what amounts to reasonable suspicion. The MPS will continue to use this valuable policing tool. During 2005 the MPS conducted nearly 250,000 stop and searches using the range of powers available. Stop and Search Question No: 301 / 2006 Bob Blackman What proportion of arrests for, “going equipped” and carrying offensive weapons resulted from stop and search in each of the last four years? The MPS record arrest data on a custody database. The terms "Going Equipped" and "Carrying Offensive Weapons" are not arrest categories. The MPS are therefore unable to provided arrest statistics on these terms. Stop and Search Question No: 302 / 2006 Bob Blackman How many stop and searches have been conducted in each of the last four years? The figures below provide the total number of stop and searches by the MPS for the last four financial years and to November 2005: 2001/02 = 195,457 (of which 101,270 were white and 94,187 BME) 2002/03 = 258,347 (of which 130,945 were white and 127,402 BME) 2003/04 = 233,870 (of which 115,919 were white and 117,951 BME) 2004/05 = 228,344 (of which 112,022 were white and 116,322 BME) 2005/06 (to November 2005) = 171,948 (of which 82,291 were white and 89,657 BME) Learning and Skills Council powers Question No: 303 / 2006 Elizabeth Howlett If Learning and Skills Council powers are devolved to you, what would the benefits of the change be to learners and/or employers? I believe it is essential for both learners and business in London that the powers and the responsibilities of the Learning and Skills Council transfer to the GLA as part of the current Government consultation. I will ensure that in future the work and targets of the London Learning and Skills councils are closely aligned with the needs of the London economy and London businesses. Both individual learners and business will see improved access to the services they require. There will be benefits from the creation of a single entry-point for Londoners and for employers, along with a reduction in bureaucracy and the full integration all economic development investment with skills planning and funding. It is my vision that we will have a sustained focus on developing the skills of all of the communities which make up London and finally start to address educational underachievement, low employment levels and inequalities in the London labour market. Transport Links to Queen Mary’s Hospital Question No: 304 / 2006 Elizabeth Howlett Queen Mary’s Hospital Roehampton, SW15, will be reopening very shortly. As transport links are very poor there is an urgent need for extra bus routes serving the hospital. Please would you see that TfL addresses this? Queen Mary’s Hospital is served by 3 bus services: Route 72 runs every 7.5 minutes during the day (30 minutes during the night). It links Roehampton, Barnes Station, Barnes itself, Hammersmith, Shepherd’s Bush and East Acton. Route 265 runs every 12 minutes during the day, giving links to Tolworth, Kingston Vale, Barnes Station, Putney and Putney Bridge Station. Route 493 runs every 15 minutes during the day. It links Richmond, Sheen, Wimbledon and Tooting. TfL is not aware of any capacity issues in the vicinity of the Hospital. If there are specific links that you believe are required, TfL will be happy to examine whether these can be provided. Transport Links Springfield Hospital Question No: 305 / 2006 Elizabeth Howlett Springfield Hospital, Wandsworth is currently only accessed by the G1 bus. Please would you ensure TfL explores the possibility of other bus routes to the hospital as Springfield Hospital serves a wide catchment area? The G1 provides access to Springfield Hospital, including important links from Streatham, Tooting and Clapham Junction where interchange to other bus and rail services is available. TfL has examined the possibility of extra services to this site. However the benefits do not justify the costs, as current bus usage to Springfield Hospital is relatively small. If there are any further specific links that you believe are required, TfL will be happy to examine whether these can be provided. Government Gold-plating of Droit de Suite Art Levy Question No: 306 / 2006 Peter Hulme Cross Does the Mayor support the government’s goldplating of the new droit de suite rules which imposes a minimum level of 1000 euros instead of the 3000 euros stipulated by the EU directive? Following extensive consultation on the implementation of the Artists’ Resale Right Directive in the UK, the Government concluded that if the threshold were lowered to €1,000, there would be considerable benefit to artists on low incomes, while the cost to business related to processing royalties would be minimal and there would be no risk of diverting business away from London. This conclusion seems reasonable. However, as the Directive will be reviewed in 2009, there will be an opportunity to assess the impact of the level of the threshold on artists and the art market and if necessary to propose changes. Interference in Non-EU Art Markets Question No: 307 / 2006 Peter Hulme Cross Does the Mayor agree with One London that it would be a futile waste of taxpayers’ money to lobby New York and Zurich to introduce droit de suite? As I stated in answer to Question 2450/2005, I support the Government’s attempts to make international application of artists’ resale right a priority for the EU in the context of negotiations in the World Intellectual Property Organisation. This is more likely to ensure a level global playing field for London’s Art Market than lobbying individual cities to introduce the right.* Mayor’s Draft Older People’s Strategy Question No: 308 / 2006 Peter Hulme Cross Does the Mayor think it is sensible to devise an older people’s strategy without the input of anyone over 50 in his office? The Draft London Older People’s Strategy was drawn up with the active involvement of representatives from a wide range of older people’s groups in London. I am over 50 myself, as are several members of my Management Board, who made an input to the draft strategy. In all areas of work, my aim is to have staff teams who are as representative of Londoners as possible. ID Cards Question No: 309 / 2006 Damian Hockney Given the growing concerns about the likely cost and lack of effectiveness of a national identity card scheme, does the Mayor think that the Government would be well-advised to drop this idea and use the resources to better fund the intelligence-based activities of the Metropolitan Police and other police forces and the security services? I want to make London the safest city in the world and am committed to working with the Government, the Police and other partners to achieve this vision. With the right checks and balances in place identity cards could have the potential to make London safer. However, identity cards should not come at the expense of police officers, and I have absolutely no doubt, that the increase in police numbers that my budgets have paid for are greatly enhancing the safety and security of London and represent excellent value for money. Political Correctness and Freedom of Speech Question No: 310 / 2006 Damian Hockney Does the Mayor agree with the Metropolitan Police that too much police time is wasted investigating “frivolous” public complaints about supposed “hate crimes” against groups not specifically covered by existing legislation? As Mayor, reducing crime and the fear of crime is one of my key priorities. All of London’s diverse communities have the right to live free of the fear of hate crime. I am committed to working with the police to crack down on all forms of hate crime, wherever it occurs. I fully support the Police in properly responding to all reported incidents. Where a crime has been committed, the Police have a duty to perform a thorough investigation, managing as appropriate any ensuing community issues where the crime committed was perceived to be motivated by hate. Overseas Offices Question No: 311 / 2006 Damian Hockney Can the Mayor detail any plans he has for opening offices abroad, and any cost implications. At present, I am only proposing to open offices in Beijing and Shanghai in addition to the existing office in Brussels. In principle in light of the vital importance of globalisation for London I would like to open offices to promote London in a larger number of key economic centres but cost factors restrict this. Think London, the inward investment agency funded by the LDA, will be opening an office in New York this year. China is already a major factor in the development of the world economy. I consider it is essential to ensure that London is well-placed with regard to this key emerging market, and this is why I have decided that opening offices there is a priority. The budget will run at around £900k a year average over a four year period with probably slightly greater expenditure in the first year due to office fit up, hiring staff etc - a budget of £3.755 million has been approved by the London Development Agency for establishing, staffing and running these offices over four years, after a full evaluation for value for money and return on investment. The experience of opening these offices will be evaluated, and it is possible that the option of establishing a presence (not necessarily a separate office) in other countries will be examined in the future where this is likely to be productive and cost effective for London, particularly in terms of supporting trade and inward investment for London. Marshgate Lane Compulsory Purchase Orders Question No: 312 / 2006 Damian Hockney Can the Mayor please give a further update on the number of deals now agreed with Marshgate Lane businesses and the progress of the Compulsory Purchase procedure for the rest. The London Development Agency (LDA) estimates that there are currently 304 active businesses within the Lower Lea, Olympic and Legacy CPO boundary area. Of these businesses, the LDA is in dialogue with 230 (representing 92% of the total workforce within the CPO boundary area) and of these 135 (representing 77% of the workforce within the CPO boundary area) are in negotiations with the LDA. Of the total 304 businesses, 91 currently operate in or around the Marshgate Lane area and represent 34% of the total workforce within the CPO boundary. Of these businesses, 27 are in negotiations, with a preferred site, or shortlist of sites identified. The CPO was published in November 2005. A Public Inquiry is expected to take place in the summer. The LDA’s preferred option for acquiring land continues to be by reaching private agreements with individuals land owners. London’s Food Supply Question No: 313 / 2006 Damian Hockney You recently pledged to support local food producers, saying, “by encouraging a greater supply of local, regional and organic food, and a diversity of outlets, from markets to local shops, we also safeguard our food supply in the event of a crisis.” You have also recently been instrumental in forcing the relocation and possibly closure of Britain’s oldest, most successful fish smoker, a family-run firm employing thousands of local people in East London. Are the interests of corporate property speculators more important than safeguarding London’s food supply? The draft London Food Strategy recognises the important role that a diverse, robust and vibrant food sector provides to employment and the economy. One of its early priorities is 'ensuring commercial vibrancy'. With regard to the relocation of H. Forman & Sons, which has a workforce of around 40, the London Development Agency (LDA) recognise the contribution of this and other businesses located in the Olympic Park area and this is why the LDA is committed to helping them to relocate successfully. The LDA is in close negotiations with Mr Forman and his advisors on this matter and we are confident that these negotiations will lead to the identification of a suitable site. * Appendix A Written Answers - MQT January 2006 1 / 2006 Breakdown of Policing Budget Appendix B Darren Johnson and Jenny Jones Green Group Assembly Members City Hall 24 January 2006 Dear Darren and Jenny Budget priorities for 2006/07 Following the discussions that my staff and I have had with you over recent weeks about the GLA Group budget for 2006/7, I am writing to set out my proposals on a number of important environmental and other issues relating to my budget plans for 2006/07 and beyond. First, I think it is important to record the achievements brought about by the budget priorities we agreed as part of the last budget round. I would particularly point to: • Working with TfL on a raft of measures to make the capital’s transport more sustainable and to improve road safety: o An additional £5.4m for the London Cycle Network, £1.8m for cycle training for Year 5 and 6 pupils – equating to an extra £55k per borough, and £700,000 of funding for cycle parking for all London schools requesting this facility o A £3.7m increase in TfL’s Safe Routes to School budget and a £7.2m increase in funding for road safety measures, enabling us to reach our target of a 40% cut in road deaths and serious injuries 5 years early • Estimated LDA expenditure of just under £32m on major sustainability programmes in 2005/06, including: o Just over £8m investment in Dagenham Dock Sustainable Investment Park and a plastics reprocessing plant for London o Approximately £20m of expenditure on green and public spaces o The establishment of the London Climate Change Agency • On biodiversity, securing £500,000 funding over three years from SITA’s 'Enriching Nature' programme for London to take forward wildlife and habitat projects identified in the biodiversity action plan. In terms of 2006/07, we need to consolidate and build on these achievements. This letter includes my responses to a wide range of proposals put forward by the Green Group. I am very pleased that I have been able to give a positive response in relation to all of your thirty-three proposals. I am sure that the package agreed will produce an even stronger environmental deal for London and will help achieve both your and my aspirations for a cleaner, greener London. There follows a series of commitments for next financial year broken down by authority. The London Development Agency (LDA) • The London Food Strategy is currently out for consultation and will require significant investment for it to be implemented in full. The LDA will provide a budget of £3.87m over the next three years to support the work of London Food and the Agency’s Food Unit. £653k of this £3.87m budget will be set aside for initiatives in 2006/07. A key aspect of this area of work will be the proposed development of a food hub in East London to link local smaller producers and suppliers to London’s food market • The delivery of a major zero carbon regeneration development remains a high priority for the LDA. To enable the development to progress as quickly as possible, the Agency will allocate £50k in 2006/07 to carry out a feasibility study, so that a site and a developer can be identified. The principle of exemplary sustainable development will be extended to all the LDA’s developments, and my office will monitor that it is exceeding or achieving Mayoral targets for carbon emissions, energy mix and waste • The creation of a Green Home Advice Centre is an exciting new proposal. The LDA will therefore allocate £40k in 2006/07 to carry out a feasibility study in partnership with my environment team at the GLA. Accompanying these actions is a firm commitment that a Centre will be set up – the work outlined for 2006/07 will determine timescales and budgets. It is important that we work with others on this and discussions will continue with partners (including the Energy Savings Trust, the Design Council and the London Energy Partnership) to see how this can best be delivered and necessary funds can be raised. My officers are already in discussions to attract external funding to implement this project • Priority needs to be attached to the establishment of a Sustainable Industries Research and Development Park, essentially an expanded version of the existing Environmental Technology Resource Centre for London. A detailed business plan with costed proposals will be developed by the LDA over the course of 2006/07 • Delivering the East London Green Grid presents a major challenge given its scale and the number of partners involved. I have already indicated that I will safeguard the Grid through the Review of London Plan process – my statement of intent published in December included a commitment to “support the Green Grid”. In 2006/07 the following will be put in place: o A steering group with representatives from the Mayor’s Office, the Green Group, the LDA, and Policy & Partnerships (including the Architecture and Urbanism Unit) with dedicated officers from the GLA and LDA in support o A bidding strategy (approved by the steering group) to access funds held by Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, which is the body overseeing most of budgets for the development of the Grid o As part of that strategy, a specific commitment to submitting four bids over the course of the year to the ODMP for the regeneration or ‘greening’ of certain strategic open spaces in East London. Transport for London (TfL) • TfL’s investment in travel demand management is critical to ensuring a greener, more sustainable London. TfL’s travel demand budget will therefore increase to £24m in 2006/07 (£10m more than in 2005/06) and grow further to an indicative level of £30m in 2007/08. This will enable further progress to be made in important travel demand areas such as schools, commuting, car clubs and town centres • The delivery of the London Cycle Network + by 2009 will require further TfL investment. The TfL budget for the Network will therefore increase by 25% so that it stands at £12.5m in 2006/07. There will be an evaluation part way through the year to see if boroughs can deliver on further spending during the course of the year, in which case a budget for further deliverable spending will be made available • Participation rates in cycling go hand in hand with the delivery of the Network. In 2006/07 TfL will lead on the following: o Rolling four-year action plan to increase cycle parking at rail stations, DLR and tube stations to meet shortfall in provision identified in a survey to be conducted annually. For 2005/06 £550k will be spent on cycle parking at stations, with £600k identified for 2006/07 o Continuation of a programme for cycle parking at schools. For 2005/06 £700k is being spent on this programme and a similar amount will be spent in 2006/07 o Continuation of the 2005/06 cycle training programme including provision of cycle training (which meets National Standard on Cycle Training) for year 5 and 6 school students with guaranteed funding of £1.8m o Continuation of programme to provide and improve green and off-road cycle routes. £1.3m is being spent on green routes in 2005/06 and £1.5m will be spent in 2006/07 o Work towards London-wide provision of personalised support for new cyclists (e.g. help with equipment, maintenance, negotiating routes and traffic, and security), including through the delivery of schemes in three boroughs by the end of 2006/07, with support packages set and advertised o Support for “share the road” campaign, aimed at instilling mutual respect by road users o Facilitating a “mass bike ride” in 2007 with external sponsorship o Encouraging boroughs to employ at least one dedicated cycling officer • Walking maps are an important means by which more Londoners can be encouraged to travel by foot, rather than by car. During 2006/07 TfL will produce a route finding strategy and style for all of London. Additionally boroughs will be provided with funding to develop 2D maps of their local areas • TfL will provide at least £46.4m for road safety funding in 2006/07. As a result of this investment, TfL will be well placed to sustain my new targets of 50% reduction in those killed and seriously injured on the roads (and a 60% reduction in children killed and seriously injured) by 2010. A number of actions will provide further support to meet these targets: o To incentivise boroughs to play their part in meeting these targets, TfL will provide £29.4m in 2006/07 to boroughs for education, 20 mph zones and road safety engineering works o TfL will conduct a pilot study with a view to introducing a London-wide speed awareness and driver improvement course in conjunction with the London Safety Camera Partnership o The work that TfL has commissioned on speed limiters also known as intelligent speed adaptation, will be taken forward in 2006/07 with the production of a digital map of speed limits, a design for a pilot study and then a trial exercise on certain specially equipped vehicles which will be procured in 2006/07 o Further TfL investment in school travel plans, so that spending increases from £10.2m in 2005/06 to £13.2m in 2006/07 • To ensure that plans for carrying waste by water are taken forward, TfL will allocate £425k to the development of a multi modal refuse collection vehicle in 2006/07 and a further £60k to a waste transport study. Existing feasibility studies on use of the Grand Union Canal in West London and of the River Lee in East London will also be taken forward. In addition, TfL has committed, in partnership with British Waterways, to building a winding hole on the Grand Union at West Drayton and wharf at Park Royal and estimates that £210k will be spent in 2006/07 on that venture • Reducing carbon emissions from running the Tube network is one of the major environmental challenges facing the GLA Group. TfL will produce an action plan by the end of 2006, working with the newly formed Climate Change Agency, including details of targets to be adopted and projects to be taken forward. This will include analysis of the options for LUL partnering directly with energy providers to build new renewable supplies • I want to see hydrogen vehicles form a big part of London's future transport provision. The LHP has developed a Transport Action Plan which will see 70 vehicles introduced into London by 2010. Discussions have already commenced with my functional bodies on how this plan, which includes approximately 10 buses and 60 cars, can be implemented. TfL has already established a project group which intends to invite proposals from the potential suppliers for approximately 10 buses during the first half of 2006. Options will be worked up for the deployment of the cars, including use by the GLA Group and car clubs. Up to £1.1m will be allocated from TfL’s budget in 2006/07 to take this forward. This is in addition to the £1.4m allocated to the extended trial of three hydrogen fuel-cell buses • In addition to the above London Buses will continue to further clean up the existing diesel fleet following the completion at the end of December 2006 of projects which have seen the whole fleet upgraded to meet a minimum of Euro II engine standard and all buses being fitted with particulate traps. 8 Diesel Hybrid buses, which cut Co2 emissions by over 30% will be in service by January 2006 and I plan to see more of these introduced over the next few years. London Buses also plan to fit NoX abatement technology to over 1300 existing buses over the next four years. • Make London a Low Emission Zone: o London has the worst air pollution in the UK and amongst the worst in Europe. Air pollution affects the quality of life of a large number of Londoners especially those with respiratory and cardiovascular conditions. It is estimated that every year some 1000 deaths and a similar number of hospital admissions occur due to poor air quality in London. Many more people experience discomfort through air pollution aggravating existing conditions o For these reasons I am proposing to introduce a Low Emission Zone (LEZ) to cover the whole of Greater London. In 2008 the proposed emission standard for the LEZ would be Euro III for particulates (PM10). This would apply to diesel-engined HGVs over 3.5 tonnes, buses and coaches. In 2010, the proposed emission standard for the LEZ would be tightened to Euro IV for particulates (PM10) and, subject to the scheme’s success, I would ask TfL to investigate the case for extending the LEZ to light goods vehicles. The total costs (operating and capital costs minus revenue) to TfL of delivering the LEZ (2005/06 to 2015/16) is estimated as between £93.4m and £117.5m, with between £62.2m and £70.3m spent during the TfL business plan period of 2006/7 and 2009/10 o My proposal to designate the Greater London area as Low Emission Zone (LEZ) would deliver significant air quality and health benefits by deterring the most individually polluting vehicles from driving in the area. On my behalf, TfL will conduct a public consultation on draft revisions to the Transport and Air Quality Strategies to take forward the LEZ proposal. Subject to the results of this consultation, further consultation on the detailed design of the LEZ scheme would be carried out. Greater London Authority (GLA) • It is important that the GLA has the resources to deliver my environmental policies through the statutory planning regime. The recent restructuring of the Environment Team will provide important extra resource to enable this to happen. To supplement this, there will continue to be a dedicated officer in the Planning Decisions Unit. Additionally the London Climate Change Agency will be able to provide detailed engineering advice to planning officers. This should ensure that every planning application will be assessed against the criteria given in all of my environmental strategies. If this does not prove possible with current planned staff resources I shall examine the case for extra staff in the planning unit • Funding for biodiversity initiatives in London has been patchy in recent years. As a strategic authority the GLA’s role is not to be a direct provider of funding itself, but it is important that a degree of oversight is retained on a London-wide basis. I have therefore set a target to raise £120k in sponsorship for small biodiversity projects next year, all of which will I shall underwrite, and to work with the main London biodiversity groups to support their work • We must continue to make London’s view heard on Heathrow and the proposals for runway alternation and a third runway there. The GLA will therefore make available £80k in 2006/07 for research on the impact of the proposals pending the Government’s forthcoming white paper on aviation. Another £10k will be spent on polling from funding carried over from 2005/06 • The 100 Public Spaces Programme is a major exercise and a priority for the GLA Group going forward. In 2006/07 six of the Programme’s projects will be accelerated, detailed timetables drawn up and progress reported • The Empty Homes Agency’s Empty Property Hotline is an important resource and it is important that a long-term secure funding source can be found. As an interim measure the GLA will provide £25k of funding to the Hotline in 2006/07 and the two years following that. If specific projects emerge in that period, the Agency can submit details for separate consideration • Planning Aid for London provides strategic planning advice to community groups which do not have sufficient resources or capacity to access this type of information and advice. The GLA will continue to support Planning Aid and will make available £35k in 2006/07 for this purpose • The London Waterways Commission aims to revive London’s waterways and will need sufficient resources to undertake this important task. Dedicated officer support from TfL and the GLA will therefore be provided to the Advisory Group in 2006/07 • My budget proposals for 2006/07 will provide further support to a range of environmental strategies and initiatives funded and staffed by the GLA: o An extra post for sustainable procurement from 2006/07 o An extra post in the waste team from 2006/07 specialising in waste disposal o An additional £100,000 for waste disposal work in 2006/07 and £200,000 in 2007/08 and 2008/09 o An additional £70,000 for work on the climate change adaptation strategy in 2006/07 o An extra post on the climate change adaptation strategy from 2007/08 o An additional £110,000 for the work on the Water Action Framework in 2006/07. Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) • The Metropolitan Police Service’s Service Review will have far reaching consequences for the future of the Metropolitan Police. Understandably the review process has focused on workforce modernisation and creating greater efficiencies to deliver on the MPS's widening mission. However this should not be at the expense of resources for road safety policing. I am therefore committed, as part of the 2006/07 budget setting process, to ensuring that there is no reduction in road safety police officer numbers • The Safer Neighbourhoods programme has revolutionised the workings of the Metropolitan Police. It is therefore essential that the teams are as accessible as possible to the public. As part of the 2006/07 budget setting process, I shall be looking at ways in which this can be brought about. Every Londoner will know the phone number to contact their local team and how to arrange face-to-face meetings • Low conviction rates in rape cases are a cause of concern for me and many others. As part of the 2006/07 budget setting process, I shall be looking to work with the Metropolitan Police and other criminal justice agencies on a major campaign to reduce the prevalence of rape and change public attitudes. With the Metropolitan Police, I will provide financial support for the recommendations arising from the current Metropolitan Police Service 127 internal review of the handling of rape cases, and funding to ensure a good and improving level of service from the Havens. GLA Group • The GLA Group must work together on sustainable development issues. The GLA will therefore lead on Group-wide initiatives in the following areas in 2006/07: o Green energy and GLA Group procurement – a plan will be published during the course of 2006/07 showing how the Group can make greater use of green energy through its procurement activities o Energy efficiency across the GLA Group – in 2006/07 energy efficiency targets will be set for the Group and progress against these targets will be monitored and reported o Recycling across the GLA Group – the Group will aim to recycle 25% of its waste by 2007 and reach much higher targets in the following three years. Progress against these targets will be monitored and reported o Recycled products and GLA Group procurement – a Sustainable Procurement Code for the Group will be agreed and implemented during 2006/07 o Sustainable Travel Plans for the GLA Group – Sustainable Travel Plans will be completed across the Group by the end of 2006/07 o Environmental performance indicators and targets – in 2006/07 environmental performance indicators, including carbon emission reduction targets consistent with the London-wide targets in my Energy Strategy will be set for the Group and progress will be monitored and reported. As I have already acknowledged, the contribution made by your proposals has been very significant in improving GLA Group delivery in the current year and in shaping my plans for next year and beyond. I look forward to continuing to work together on these important issues for the capital. Yours sincerely KEN LIVINGSTONE Mayor of London 128 129 Appendix C Written Answers – MQT January 2006 140 - 171 / 2006 - Territorial Policing Police and PCSO strength 2000/01 to 2004/05 by borough, and April to November 2005 130 Appendix D Written answers – MQT January 2006 188-192 Carjacking Offences Carjacking Offences, MPS, 2001 - 2005 Year Total 2001 from Aug 20 2002 660 2003 629 2004 577 2005 721 Grand Total 2607 Break Down by Borough Month Division Number (from August) 2001 2001/08 BARNET 1 2001/09 CROYDON 3 2001/10 EALING 1 2001/10 CROYDON 3 2001/11 HACKNEY 2 2001/11 CROYDON 4 2001/12 CROYDON 6 2002 2002/01 GREENWICH 1 2002/01 WANDSWORTH 15 2002/01 HARINGEY 1 2002/01 CROYDON 6 2002/02 HACKNEY 6 2002/02 TOWER HAMLETS 4 2002/02 WALTHAM FOREST 1 2002/02 REDBRIDGE 2 2002/02 HAVERING 1 2002/02 NEWHAM 2 2002/02 LAMBETH 1 2002/02 ISLINGTON 1 2002/02 HARROW 1 2002/02 BRENT 1 2002/02 BARNET 2 2002/02 HOUNSLOW 1 2002/02 WANDSWORTH 4 2002/02 HILLINGDON 1 2002/02 ENFIELD 5 2002/02 HARINGEY 13 2002/02 CROYDON 4 2002/03 BELGRAVIA 1 2002/03 PADDINGTON 2 2002/03 SOUTHWARK 2 131 2002/03 HACKNEY 8 2002/03 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2002/03 WALTHAM FOREST 9 2002/03 REDBRIDGE 5 2002/03 NEWHAM 11 2002/03 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2002/03 LAMBETH 5 2002/03 SOUTHWARK 2 2002/03 ISLINGTON 2 2002/03 LEWISHAM 3 2002/03 BRENT 3 2002/03 GREENWICH 2 2002/03 BARNET 1 2002/03 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2002/03 HOUNSLOW 1 2002/03 MERTON 1 2002/03 WANDSWORTH 2 2002/03 HILLINGDON 2 2002/03 ENFIELD 1 2002/03 HARINGEY 4 2002/03 CROYDON 5 2002/03 SUTTON 1 2002/04 MARYLEBONE 1 2002/04 PADDINGTON 1 2002/04 SOUTHWARK 1 2002/04 HACKNEY 4 2002/04 TOWER HAMLETS 7 2002/04 WALTHAM FOREST 5 2002/04 REDBRIDGE 9 2002/04 NEWHAM 5 2002/04 LAMBETH 5 2002/04 SOUTHWARK 1 2002/04 ISLINGTON 1 2002/04 LEWISHAM 2 2002/04 BRENT 6 2002/04 GREENWICH 1 2002/04 BARNET 1 2002/04 HOUNSLOW 4 2002/04 MERTON 1 2002/04 WANDSWORTH 1 2002/04 HILLINGDON 2 2002/04 ENFIELD 3 2002/04 HARINGEY 2 2002/04 CROYDON 4 2002/05 MARYLEBONE 1 2002/05 PADDINGTON 1 2002/05 HACKNEY 8 2002/05 TOWER HAMLETS 3 2002/05 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2002/05 REDBRIDGE 2 2002/05 NEWHAM 4 2002/05 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2002/05 LAMBETH 12 2002/05 SOUTHWARK 4 132 2002/05 LEWISHAM 3 2002/05 HARROW 3 2002/05 BRENT 3 2002/05 BARNET 2 2002/05 HOUNSLOW 1 2002/05 MERTON 1 2002/05 WANDSWORTH 3 2002/05 EALING 4 2002/05 ENFIELD 2 2002/05 HARINGEY 9 2002/05 CROYDON 1 2002/05 SUTTON 1 2002/06 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2002/06 PADDINGTON 1 2002/06 SOUTHWARK 1 2002/06 HACKNEY 3 2002/06 TOWER HAMLETS 4 2002/06 WALTHAM FOREST 1 2002/06 REDBRIDGE 4 2002/06 NEWHAM 6 2002/06 LAMBETH 3 2002/06 SOUTHWARK 3 2002/06 LEWISHAM 2 2002/06 BRENT 5 2002/06 GREENWICH 1 2002/06 HOUNSLOW 1 2002/06 WANDSWORTH 5 2002/06 EALING 1 2002/06 HILLINGDON 2 2002/06 ENFIELD 2 2002/06 HARINGEY 8 2002/07 SOUTHWARK 2 2002/07 HACKNEY 1 2002/07 TOWER HAMLETS 5 2002/07 WALTHAM FOREST 6 2002/07 HAVERING 1 2002/07 NEWHAM 9 2002/07 LAMBETH 1 2002/07 SOUTHWARK 3 2002/07 ISLINGTON 1 2002/07 BROMLEY 1 2002/07 BRENT 1 2002/07 GREENWICH 3 2002/07 BEXLEY 1 2002/07 BARNET 1 2002/07 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2002/07 EALING 1 2002/07 HILLINGDON 1 2002/07 ENFIELD 1 2002/07 HARINGEY 7 2002/07 CROYDON 10 2002/08 CHARING CROSS 1 2002/08 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2002/08 TOWER HAMLETS 2 133 2002/08 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2002/08 NEWHAM 7 2002/08 LAMBETH 1 2002/08 SOUTHWARK 1 2002/08 LEWISHAM 1 2002/08 HARROW 1 2002/08 BRENT 5 2002/08 GREENWICH 3 2002/08 BARNET 2 2002/08 HOUNSLOW 2 2002/08 MERTON 1 2002/08 EALING 1 2002/08 HILLINGDON 4 2002/08 ENFIELD 4 2002/08 HARINGEY 4 2002/08 CROYDON 2 2002/09 SOUTHWARK 2 2002/09 HACKNEY 1 2002/09 TOWER HAMLETS 3 2002/09 WALTHAM FOREST 4 2002/09 REDBRIDGE 6 2002/09 NEWHAM 5 2002/09 LAMBETH 3 2002/09 HARROW 3 2002/09 BRENT 2 2002/09 GREENWICH 1 2002/09 BEXLEY 1 2002/09 WANDSWORTH 4 2002/09 ENFIELD 2 2002/09 HARINGEY 2 2002/09 CROYDON 5 2002/10 MARYLEBONE 1 2002/10 PADDINGTON 1 2002/10 SOUTHWARK 2 2002/10 HACKNEY 3 2002/10 TOWER HAMLETS 5 2002/10 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2002/10 REDBRIDGE 4 2002/10 HAVERING 2 2002/10 NEWHAM 11 2002/10 LAMBETH 1 2002/10 SOUTHWARK 3 2002/10 ISLINGTON 2 2002/10 LEWISHAM 1 2002/10 BROMLEY 1 2002/10 HARROW 2 2002/10 BRENT 1 2002/10 GREENWICH 3 2002/10 BARNET 5 2002/10 MERTON 3 2002/10 WANDSWORTH 2 2002/10 EALING 1 2002/10 CROYDON 1 2002/11 TOWER HAMLETS 6 134 2002/11 WALTHAM FOREST 6 2002/11 REDBRIDGE 1 2002/11 HAVERING 1 2002/11 NEWHAM 4 2002/11 LAMBETH 2 2002/11 SOUTHWARK 5 2002/11 LEWISHAM 2 2002/11 HARROW 2 200211 GREENWICH 2 2002/11 BEXLEY 1 2002/11 HOUNSLOW 2 2002/11 EALING 2 2002/11 ENFIELD 2 2002/11 HARINGEY 1 2002/11 CROYDON 7 2002/11 SUTTON 1 2002/12 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2002/12 MARYLEBONE 5 2002/12 PADDINGTON 1 2002/12 SOUTHWARK 3 200212 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2002/12 TOWER HAMLETS 6 2002/12 WALTHAM FOREST 4 2002/12 REDBRIDGE 1 2002/12 HAVERING 3 2002/12 NEWHAM 9 2002/12 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2002/12 LAMBETH 8 2002/12 SOUTHWARK 3 2002/12 HARROW 2 2002/12 BRENT 1 2002/12 GREENWICH 1 2002/12 BEXLEY 1 2002/12 BARNET 3 2002/12 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2002/12 HOUNSLOW 1 2002/12 WANDSWORTH 3 2002/12 EALING 1 2002/12 HILLINGDON 1 2002/12 ENFIELD 4 2002/12 CROYDON 1 2003 2003/01 PADDINGTON 1 2003/01 SOUTHWARK 2 2003/01 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2003/01 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2003/01 REDBRIDGE 3 2003/01 NEWHAM 15 2003/01 LAMBETH 2 2003/01 SOUTHWARK 3 2003/01 LEWISHAM 2 2003/01 HARROW 2 2003/01 BRENT 1 2003/01 GREENWICH 1 135 2003/01 HOUNSLOW 1 2003/01 HILLINGDON 2 2003/01 HARINGEY 5 2003/01 CROYDON 3 2003/02 MARYLEBONE 1 2003/02 PADDINGTON 1 2003/02 HACKNEY 1 2003/02 TOWER HAMLETS 5 2003/02 WALTHAM FOREST 9 2003/02 REDBRIDGE 2 2003/02 NEWHAM 9 2003/02 LAMBETH 1 2003/02 SOUTHWARK 2 2003/02 HARROW 1 2003/02 BRENT 1 2003/02 BARNET 2 2003/02 HARINGEY 6 2003/02 CROYDON 4 2003/03 MARYLEBONE 1 2003/03 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/03 TOWER HAMLETS 5 2003/03 WALTHAM FOREST 8 2003/03 REDBRIDGE 2 2003/03 HAVERING 1 2003/03 NEWHAM 9 2003/03 LAMBETH 2 2003/03 SOUTHWARK 5 2003/03 LEWISHAM 3 2003/03 BRENT 3 2003/03 GREENWICH 1 2003/03 BEXLEY 1 2003/03 BARNET 2 2003/03 MERTON 3 2003/03 WANDSWORTH 2 2003/03 EALING 1 2003/03 HILLINGDON 1 2003/03 ENFIELD 2 2003/03 HARINGEY 3 2003/03 CROYDON 4 2003/04 SOUTHWARK 2 2003/04 HACKNEY 1 2003/04 TOWER HAMLETS 3 2003/04 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2003/04 REDBRIDGE 6 2003/04 NEWHAM 2 2003/04 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2003/04 LAMBETH 7 2003/04 LEWISHAM 3 2003/04 HARROW 1 2003/04 BRENT 1 2003/04 GREENWICH 1 2003/04 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2003/04 HOUNSLOW 1 2003/04 WANDSWORTH 3 136 2003/04 HILLINGDON 1 2003/04 CROYDON 3 2003/05 MARYLEBONE 1 2003/05 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/05 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2003/05 HACKNEY 1 2003/05 TOWER HAMLETS 4 2003/05 WALTHAM FOREST 4 2003/05 REDBRIDGE 4 2003/05 NEWHAM 10 2003/05 LAMBETH 4 2003/05 SOUTHWARK 2 2003/05 HARROW 1 2003/05 BRENT 3 2003/05 GREENWICH 1 2003/05 BARNET 1 2003/05 HOUNSLOW 2 2003/05 EALING 4 2003/05 ENFIELD 1 2003/05 CROYDON 3 2003/06 SOUTHWARK 3 2003/06 HACKNEY 4 2003/06 TOWER HAMLETS 7 2003/06 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2003/06 REDBRIDGE 5 2003/06 HAVERING 1 2003/06 NEWHAM 2 2003/06 LAMBETH 2 2003/06 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/06 BROMLEY 1 2003/06 BRENT 1 2003/06 GREENWICH 7 2003/06 HOUNSLOW 1 2003/06 EALING 3 2003/06 HILLINGDON 2 2003/06 CROYDON 1 2003/07 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/07 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2003/07 HACKNEY 3 2003/07 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2003/07 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2003/07 REDBRIDGE 1 2003/07 HAVERING 1 2003/07 NEWHAM 2 2003/07 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 5 2003/07 SOUTHWARK 6 2003/07 ISLINGTON 1 2003/07 LEWISHAM 5 2003/07 HARROW 1 2003/07 BRENT 3 2003/07 GREENWICH 1 2003/07 BEXLEY 1 2003/07 BARNET 1 2003/07 MERTON 1 137 2003/07 WANDSWORTH 2 2003/07 EALING 3 2003/07 HILLINGDON 1 2003/07 ENFIELD 4 2003/07 HARINGEY 1 2003/07 CROYDON 1 2003/07 SUTTON 1 2003/08 PADDINGTON 2 2003/08 HACKNEY 3 2003/08 TOWER HAMLETS 5 2003/08 WALTHAM FOREST 12 2003/08 REDBRIDGE 1 2003/08 HAVERING 1 2003/08 NEWHAM 6 2003/08 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2003/08 LAMBETH 1 2003/08 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/08 ISLINGTON 4 2003/08 LEWISHAM 1 2003/08 BROMLEY 1 2003/08 HARROW 1 2003/08 BRENT 7 2003/08 GREENWICH 4 2003/08 BEXLEY 2 2003/08 BARNET 1 2003/08 HOUNSLOW 2 2003/08 MERTON 1 2003/08 EALING 6 2003/08 ENFIELD 8 2003/08 HARINGEY 2 2003/08 CROYDON 4 2003/09 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2003/09 MARYLEBONE 1 2003/09 HACKNEY 4 2003/09 TOWER HAMLETS 3 2003/09 WALTHAM FOREST 6 2003/09 REDBRIDGE 3 2003/09 HAVERING 2 2003/09 NEWHAM 2 2003/09 SOUTHWARK 6 2003/09 LEWISHAM 1 2003/09 BROMLEY 2 2003/09 HARROW 1 2003/09 BRENT 3 2003/09 BEXLEY 1 2003/09 HOUNSLOW 2 2003/09 MERTON 1 2003/09 WANDSWORTH 1 2003/09 EALING 1 2003/09 HILLINGDON 2 2003/09 ENFIELD 2 2003/09 HARINGEY 1 2003/09 CROYDON 4 2003/10 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 138 2003/10 SOUTHWARK 3 2003/10 HACKNEY 1 2003/10 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2003/10 REDBRIDGE 3 2003/10 NEWHAM 4 2003/10 LAMBETH 5 2003/10 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/10 ISLINGTON 3 2003/10 LEWISHAM 1 2003/10 BROMLEY 1 2003/10 HARROW 3 2003/10 BRENT 4 2003/10 GREENWICH 1 2003/10 BEXLEY 1 2003/10 MERTON 1 2003/10 EALING 5 2003/10 HILLINGDON 2 2003/10 ENFIELD 1 2003/10 HARINGEY 4 2003/10 CROYDON 2 2003/11 PADDINGTON 1 2003/11 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/11 HACKNEY 7 2003/11 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2003/11 WALTHAM FOREST 5 2003/11 REDBRIDGE 2 2003/11 NEWHAM 6 2003/11 LAMBETH 2 2003/11 SOUTHWARK 4 2003/11 ISLINGTON 2 2003/11 LEWISHAM 3 2003/11 BROMLEY 1 2003/11 HARROW 1 2003/11 BRENT 5 2003/11 GREENWICH 1 200311 BARNET 2 2003/11 WANDSWORTH 3 2003/11 EALING 2 2003/11 HILLINGDON 1 2003/11 CROYDON 2 2003/12 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2003/12 PADDINGTON 1 2003/12 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/12 HACKNEY 3 2003/12 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2003/12 WALTHAM FOREST 6 2003/12 REDBRIDGE 2 2003/12 HAVERING 3 2003/12 NEWHAM 5 2003/12 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2003/12 LAMBETH 1 2003/12 SOUTHWARK 1 2003/12 ISLINGTON 1 2003/12 BROMLEY 1 139 2003/12 HARROW 2 2003/12 BRENT 5 2003/12 BARNET 4 2003/12 HOUNSLOW 1 2003/12 WANDSWORTH 5 2003/12 EALING 4 2003/12 HILLINGDON 6 2003/12 ENFIELD 1 2003/12 HARINGEY 1 2003/12 CROYDON 7 2004 2004/01 MARYLEBONE 1 2004/01 PADDINGTON 3 2004/01 SOUTHWARK 2 2004/01 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 2 2004/01 HACKNEY 3 2004/01 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2004/01 WALTHAM FOREST 4 2004/01 REDBRIDGE 2 2004/01 HAVERING 1 2004/01 NEWHAM 8 2004/01 LAMBETH 5 2004/01 SOUTHWARK 3 2004/01 LEWISHAM 2 2004/01 BRENT 4 2004/01 GREENWICH 1 2004/01 BEXLEY 2 2004/01 BARNET 3 2004/01 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2004/01 WANDSWORTH 1 2004/01 EALING 3 2004/01 HILLINGDON 3 2004/01 ENFIELD 3 2004/01 HARINGEY 4 2004/01 CROYDON 1 2004/02 PADDINGTON 1 2004/02 HACKNEY 1 2004/02 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2004/02 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2004/02 REDBRIDGE 5 2004/02 HAVERING 2 2004/02 NEWHAM 6 2004/02 LAMBETH 1 2004/02 LEWISHAM 1 2004/02 BRENT 4 2004/02 GREENWICH 1 2004/02 BARNET 1 2004/02 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2004/02 HOUNSLOW 3 2004/02 KINGSTON UPON THAMES 2 2004/02 EALING 1 2004/02 ENFIELD 2 2004/02 HARINGEY 2 2004/02 CROYDON 2 140 2004/02 SUTTON 1 2004/03 SOUTHWARK 1 2004/03 HACKNEY 4 2004/03 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2004/03 WALTHAM FOREST 7 2004/03 REDBRIDGE 4 2004/03 HAVERING 2 2004/03 NEWHAM 4 2004/03 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2004/03 LAMBETH 1 2004/03 SOUTHWARK 1 2004/03 LEWISHAM 2 2004/03 BROMLEY 1 2004/03 HARROW 1 2004//03 BRENT 2 2004/03 GREENWICH 1 2004/03 BARNET 1 2004/03 HOUNSLOW 1 2004/03 EALING 2 2004/03 HILLINGDON 3 2004/03 ENFIELD 1 2004/03 HARINGEY 1 2004/03 CROYDON 4 2004/04 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2004/04 HACKNEY 3 2004/04 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2004/04 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2004/04 REDBRIDGE 5 2004/04 HAVERING 1 2004/04 NEWHAM 6 2004/04 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 3 2004/04 LAMBETH 3 2004/04 SOUTHWARK 5 2004/04 BRENT 5 2004/04 GREENWICH 1 2004/04 HOUNSLOW 4 2004/04 WANDSWORTH 1 2004/04 EALING 1 2004/04 HILLINGDON 2 2004/04 ENFIELD 1 2004/04 HARINGEY 1 2004/04 CROYDON 2 2004/05 PADDINGTON 1 2004/05 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2004/05 HACKNEY 2 2004/05 TOWER HAMLETS 3 2004/05 WALTHAM FOREST 4 2004/05 REDBRIDGE 6 2004/05 NEWHAM 2 2004/05 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2004/05 LAMBETH 1 2004/05 SOUTHWARK 2 2004/05 LEWISHAM 1 2004/05 BROMLEY 2 141 2004/05 BRENT 1 2004/05 GREENWICH 1 2004/05 BEXLEY 1 2004/05 HOUNSLOW 2 2004/05 MERTON 1 2004/05 WANDSWORTH 2 2004/05 ENFIELD 4 2004/05 CROYDON 5 2004/06 BELGRAVIA 1 2004/06 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2004/06 SOUTHWARK 1 2004/06 HACKNEY 4 2004/06 TOWER HAMLETS 5 2004/06 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2004/06 NEWHAM 5 2004/06 SOUTHWARK 1 2004/06 ISLINGTON 2 2004/06 LEWISHAM 2 2004/06 HARROW 2 2004/06 BRENT 5 2004/06 GREENWICH 1 2004/06 HOUNSLOW 4 2004/06 MERTON 1 2004/06 WANDSWORTH 2 2004/06 HILLINGDON 1 2004/06 ENFIELD 1 2004/07 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2004/07 PADDINGTON 1 2004/07 SOUTHWARK 1 2004/07 HACKNEY 2 2004/07 REDBRIDGE 3 2004/07 HAVERING 1 2004/07 NEWHAM 5 2004/07 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2004/07 SOUTHWARK 6 2004/07 ISLINGTON 1 2004/07 BRENT 4 2004/07 GREENWICH 1 2004/07 BARNET 2 2004/07 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2004/07 HOUNSLOW 3 2004/07 WANDSWORTH 1 2004/07 EALING 9 2004/07 HILLINGDON 2 2004/07 ENFIELD 3 2004/07 CROYDON 1 2004/08 WEST END CENTRAL 1 2004/08 MARYLEBONE 1 2004/08 HACKNEY 4 2004/08 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2004/08 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2004/08 REDBRIDGE 1 2004/08 NEWHAM 6 2004/08 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 142 2004/08 LAMBETH 3 2004/08 SOUTHWARK 5 2004/08 ISLINGTON 1 2004/08 LEWISHAM 1 2004/08 HARROW 1 2004/08 WANDSWORTH 3 2004/08 EALING 4 2004/08 HILLINGDON 3 2004/08 ENFIELD 1 2004/08 HARINGEY 2 2004/08 CROYDON 1 2004/09 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2004/09 PADDINGTON 3 2004/09 HACKNEY 5 2004/09 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2004/09 WALTHAM FOREST 6 2004/09 REDBRIDGE 2 2004/09 NEWHAM 8 2004/09 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2004/09 LAMBETH 1 2004/09 SOUTHWARK 3 2004/09 LEWISHAM 1 2004/09 HARROW 1 2004/09 BRENT 7 2004/09 GREENWICH 1 2004/09 BEXLEY 2 2004/09 HOUNSLOW 1 2004/09 EALING 1 2004/09 HILLINGDON 1 2004/09 ENFIELD 1 2004/09 SUTTON 1 2004/10 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2004/10 HACKNEY 4 2004/10 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2004/10 WALTHAM FOREST 4 2004/10 REDBRIDGE 3 2004/10 HAVERING 1 2004/10 NEWHAM 11 2004/10 SOUTHWARK 3 2004/10 ISLINGTON 1 2004/10 LEWISHAM 6 2004/10 BROMLEY 1 2004/10 BRENT 2 2004/10 GREENWICH 2 2004/10 BEXLEY 1 2004/10 BARNET 1 2004/10 HOUNSLOW 2 2004/10 EALING 4 2004/10 HILLINGDON 1 2004/10 CROYDON 2 2004/11 PADDINGTON 1 2004/11 SOUTHWARK 1 2004/11 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 2 2004/11 HACKNEY 3 143 2004/11 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2004/11 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2004/11 REDBRIDGE 2 2004/11 HAVERING 1 2004/11 NEWHAM 9 2004/11 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2004/11 SOUTHWARK 4 2004/11 BRENT 8 2004/11 BARNET 1 2004/11 HOUNSLOW 1 2004/11 EALING 5 2004/11 HILLINGDON 1 2004/11 HARINGEY 1 2004/11 CROYDON 3 2004/11 SUTTON 1 2004/12 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2004/12 SOUTHWARK 2 2004/12 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 2 2004/12 HACKNEY 2 2004/12 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2004/12 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2004/12 REDBRIDGE 4 2004/12 HAVERING 2 2004/12 NEWHAM 6 2004/12 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2004/12 SOUTHWARK 2 2004/12 ISLINGTON 1 2004/12 LEWISHAM 1 2004/12 BROMLEY 1 2004/12 HARROW 1 2004/12 BRENT 5 2004/12 BARNET 1 2004/12 HOUNSLOW 3 2004/12 EALING 3 2004/12 HILLINGDON 1 2004/12 CROYDON 1 2005 2005/01 PADDINGTON 1 2005/01 SOUTHWARK 2 2005/01 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 3 2005/01 HACKNEY 3 2005/01 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2005/01 WALTHAM FOREST 5 2005/01 REDBRIDGE 2 2005/01 HAVERING 1 2005/01 NEWHAM 9 2005/01 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 3 2005/01 SOUTHWARK 4 2005/01 ISLINGTON 2 2005/01 BRENT 8 2005/01 GREENWICH 3 2005/01 BARNET 2 2005/01 HOUNSLOW 1 2005/01 MERTON 1 144 2005/01 WANDSWORTH 2 2005/01 HILLINGDON 1 2005/01 ENFIELD 1 2005/01 HARINGEY 1 2005/01 CROYDON 1 2005/02 PADDINGTON 1 2005/02 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2005/02 HACKNEY 1 2005/02 TOWER HAMLETS 4 2005/02 REDBRIDGE 6 2005/02 HAVERING 3 2005/02 NEWHAM 3 2005/02 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2005/02 LAMBETH 1 2005/02 SOUTHWARK 2 2005/02 ISLINGTON 1 2005/02 LEWISHAM 1 2005/02 BRENT 1 2005/02 GREENWICH 1 2005/02 BARNET 2 2005/02 HOUNSLOW 1 2005/02 KINGSTON UPON THAMES 2 2005/02 WANDSWORTH 3 2005/02 EALING 3 2005/02 HILLINGDON 2 2005/02 HARINGEY 3 2005/02 CROYDON 1 2005/03 MARYLEBONE 1 2005/03 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 3 2005/03 HACKNEY 1 2005/03 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2005/03 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2005/03 REDBRIDGE 9 2005/03 HAVERING 5 2005/03 NEWHAM 3 2005/03 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2005/03 LAMBETH 1 2005/03 SOUTHWARK 5 2005/03 LEWISHAM 1 2005/03 BRENT 3 2005/03 GREENWICH 2 2005/03 BARNET 1 2005/03 HOUNSLOW 1 2005/03 WANDSWORTH 1 2005/03 EALING 3 2005/03 HILLINGDON 1 2005/03 ENFIELD 2 2005/03 HARINGEY 1 2005/03 CROYDON 4 2005/04 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2005/04 HACKNEY 4 2005/04 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2005/04 WALTHAM FOREST 7 2005/04 REDBRIDGE 4 145 2005/04 HAVERING 4 2005/04 NEWHAM 11 2005/04 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2005/04 SOUTHWARK 4 2005/04 ISLINGTON 1 2005/04 LEWISHAM 1 2005/04 BRENT 3 2005/04 HOUNSLOW 2 2005/04 EALING 3 2005/04 ENFIELD 3 2005/04 CROYDON 6 2005/05 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2005/05 MARYLEBONE 1 2005/05 SOUTHWARK 4 2005/05 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 2 2005/05 TOWER HAMLETS 7 2005/05 WALTHAM FOREST 2 2005/05 REDBRIDGE 6 2005/05 HAVERING 5 2005/05 NEWHAM 8 2005/05 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2005/05 LAMBETH 5 2005/05 SOUTHWARK 2 2005/05 HARROW 2 2005/05 BRENT 2 2005/05 GREENWICH 5 2005/05 BEXLEY 1 2005/05 BARNET 2 2005/05 WANDSWORTH 2 2005/05 EALING 5 2005/05 HILLINGDON 4 2005/05 HARINGEY 3 2005/05 CROYDON 2 2005/06 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 2 2005/06 PADDINGTON 6 2005/06 SOUTHWARK 2 2005/06 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 5 2005/06 TOWER HAMLETS 4 2005/06 WALTHAM FOREST 1 2005/06 REDBRIDGE 6 2005/06 HAVERING 2 2005/06 NEWHAM 6 2005/06 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 6 2005/06 LAMBETH 1 2005/06 SOUTHWARK 1 2005/06 ISLINGTON 2 2005/06 BRENT 6 2005/06 BEXLEY 1 2005/06 BARNET 1 2005/06 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 5 2005/06 HOUNSLOW 2 2005/06 MERTON 2 2005/06 WANDSWORTH 3 2005/06 EALING 3 146 2005/06 HILLINGDON 2 2005/06 HARINGEY 2 2005/07 HACKNEY 3 2005/07 TOWER HAMLETS 5 2005/07 WALTHAM FOREST 1 2005/07 REDBRIDGE 2 2005/07 HAVERING 6 2005/07 NEWHAM 6 2005/07 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 6 2005/07 SOUTHWARK 1 2005/07 ISLINGTON 1 2005/07 BROMLEY 1 2005/07 HARROW 1 2005/07 BRENT 6 2005/07 GREENWICH 2 2005/07 BARNET 4 2005/07 MERTON 2 2005/07 WANDSWORTH 1 2005/07 EALING 4 2005/07 HILLINGDON 3 2005/07 ENFIELD 1 2005/07 HARINGEY 2 2005/08 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2005/08 HACKNEY 4 2005/08 TOWER HAMLETS 3 2005/08 WALTHAM FOREST 6 2005/08 HAVERING 5 2005/08 NEWHAM 11 2005/08 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 8 2005/08 LAMBETH 1 2005/08 SOUTHWARK 3 2005/08 LEWISHAM 3 2005/08 BROMLEY 2 2005/08 BRENT 4 2005/08 BARNET 1 2005/08 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 1 2005/08 HOUNSLOW 2 2005/08 WANDSWORTH 2 2005/08 EALING 4 2005/08 HILLINGDON 2 2005/08 ENFIELD 1 2005/08 CROYDON 5 2005/09 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2005/09 PADDINGTON 1 2005/09 TOWER HAMLETS 4 2005/09 REDBRIDGE 2 2005/09 HAVERING 1 2005/09 NEWHAM 4 2005/09 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 3 2005/09 SOUTHWARK 1 2005/09 ISLINGTON 1 2005/09 LEWISHAM 2 2005/09 HARROW 1 2005/09 BRENT 4 147 2005/09 GREENWICH 4 2005/09 BEXLEY 1 2005/09 BARNET 1 2005/09 HOUNSLOW 1 2005/09 WANDSWORTH 2 2005/09 EALING 6 2005/09 HILLINGDON 1 2005/09 ENFIELD 3 2005/09 HARINGEY 3 2005/09 CROYDON 1 2005/10 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 1 2005/10 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 6 2005/10 TOWER HAMLETS 10 2005/10 WALTHAM FOREST 5 2005/10 REDBRIDGE 6 2005/10 HAVERING 2 2005/10 NEWHAM 11 2005/10 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2005/10 LAMBETH 2 2005/10 SOUTHWARK 3 2005/10 LEWISHAM 2 2005/10 HARROW 1 2005/10 BRENT 1 2005/10 GREENWICH 1 2005/10 BEXLEY 3 2005/10 BARNET 2 2005/10 RICHMOND UPON THAMES 2 2005/10 MERTON 1 2005/10 WANDSWORTH 2 2005/10 EALING 6 2005/10 HILLINGDON 1 2005/10 ENFIELD 4 2005/10 HARINGEY 2 2005/10 CROYDON 6 2005/11 SOUTHWARK 1 2005/11 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 2 2005/11 TOWER HAMLETS 1 2005/11 WALTHAM FOREST 3 2005/11 REDBRIDGE 4 2005/11 HAVERING 1 2005/11 NEWHAM 14 2005/11 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 2 2005/11 LAMBETH 1 2005/11 BROMLEY 2 2005/11 BRENT 3 2005/11 GREENWICH 2 2005/11 BEXLEY 2 2005/11 HOUNSLOW 1 2005/11 MERTON 1 2005/11 WANDSWORTH 1 2005/11 EALING 2 2005/11 HILLINGDON 4 2005/11 HARINGEY 4 2005/11 CROYDON 3 148 2005/11 SUTTON 1 2005/12 KENSINGTON AND CHELSEA 3 2005/12 HAMMERSMITH AND FULHAM 1 2005/12 HACKNEY 3 2005/12 TOWER HAMLETS 2 2005/12 WALTHAM FOREST 5 2005/12 REDBRIDGE 5 2005/12 HAVERING 1 2005/12 NEWHAM 10 2005/12 BARKING AND DAGENHAM 1 2005/12 LAMBETH 2 2005/12 BRENT 2 2005/12 BARNET 1 2005/12 HOUNSLOW 4 2005/12 MERTON 1 2005/12 WANDSWORTH 2 2005/12 EALING 1 2005/12 HILLINGDON 3 2005/12 HARINGEY 1 2005/12 CROYDON 8 149 Appendix E Written Answers – MQT January 2006 276/ 2006 Kulture2Couture Kulture2Couture Exhibitors 1 Amanda Louise Designs 2 Anita Moore Designs 3 Axiom Clothing 4 Ayewan 5 Black Butterfly 6 Carmuh 7 Cecile Jeffrey 8 Charlie Allen 9 Cojac 10 Emmy Collins 11 Emporiana 12 E Star 13 Evoke 14 French Kiss UK 15 FunkD Up London 16 Gavin Douglas 17 Gavin Pierre Medford 18 Gisella 19 Kelly Jade 20 Konadu 21 Kosibah Creations 22 Luke Findlay Menswear 23 Maurice Sedwell 24 Natasha Wright 25 Ravoir 26 Rufus 27 Sika 28 Naomi Simms 29 Just Like Me 30 Willbaforce 31 Les Campbell 32 SIIM 33 3D by Dexter Pottinger 34 MINKA 35 Neah-Lis 36 Carlton Brown 37 Ande Sew 38 A La Carte Model Agency 39 Body Shop International 40 Saint International 41 London Fashion Forum 42 I-Define Living Ltd 43 K Benson Associates 44 London Apparel Resource Centre 45 Maurice Sedgewell 46 Charlie Allen 150
"Question No - LEGACY LONDON - Londongovuk.rtf"