Lynne's Parliament and Haringey diary

Memorial Service at Westminster Cathedral for the two firefighters who died saving lives in a house fire earlier this year. Sitting in the Cathedral and listening to the family readings and memories was heartbreaking. Looking around at the hundreds of firefighters there to pay their respects to their colleagues and brothers who died really brought home, not just the sense of family loss and tragedy, but the true bravery and the reality of that loss.

I know, as we all know, that this is a risk of the job - but with 10 years without loss and with all of the safety measures the modern fire service now employ - we have forgotten the harsh reality and the dangers that still exist when brave firefighters put saving our lives before theirs.

It was a very beautiful, very sad and moving service.

Later in the afternoon, I had a briefing by senior Met officers on C3i. This is the new call system which will begin its proper roll-out in the Met in November. It's been worked on for years and cost a fortune - but - if it delivers what it is meant to deliver - it should all have been worth it.

The new system will integrate the thirty-two borough police control rooms into one system, along with other services such as the police’s incident support centres. There are lots of other changes involved too – including an interpretation service for people making 999 calls who have poor English.

The integration should make deploying police resources easier and more effective. There is a bit of concern from borough commanders about their staff being deployed in other boroughs as the system uses the nearest cars to attend. I am sure that will be worked out.

On a personal level, as lead member for response in the MPA - and having been banging on about the Met's failure to answer local, non-urgent calls – I was particularly glad to see that lots of this ‘customer service’ aspect appears to have been taken on board.

There will be a pathway for local calls to end up with local police - and if there is no answer, that call will go back to the operator until an answer is found for the caller. It's not what I would call a Rolls Royce customer service - but at least it is in there. So phoning those 132 police stations across London and plonking the results showing that around 40% never answered the phone does seem to have a possibly positive outcome. Hurrah!

Labels: mpa

Briefing by a senior Met officer on the double murder in Highgate and the other murders committed in London allegedly by the same person. Shocking events.

Holly Lodge estate - where the double murder of an middle-aged couple took place - is the 'nicest' type of street you can imagine. Impossible for neighbours and local residents to conceive of this tragedy.

Without going into details, it looks as if it all raises a whole raft of issues about mental health care. The Metropolitan Policy Authority (MPA) is to conduct a study in this area this year - not a moment too soon.

Labels: mpa

First, an introductory meeting with the new chair we (the GLA) have appointed to the London Transport Users’ Committee. Then I receive official news (having had whispers for a few days) that the Tories will withdraw from the GLA’s planned investigation into parking across London unless it is made into a joint exercise with the Association of London Government.

The Parking Enforcement scrutiny has been welcomed by individuals, organisations and the media alike. Hailed as 'brave' for the Assembly to investigate boldly where no one appears to have gone thoroughly before - it is set to be of interest across the capital.

However, I noticed during the coverage last week that a couple of boroughs, notably Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster appeared very angry that the Assembly was daring to look into this. As these are Tory boroughs, I wonder whether they have been exerting pressure over the GLA Tory group to withdraw.

The idea of a joint exercise with the ALG isn’t a good one. The ALG is the body which represents London boroughs, so it would in effect be taking part in an investigation of itself. Also, the ALG are an obvious body to give evidence. So it would be investigating itself based on its own evidence … I think not!

But I have asked for a meeting with them to see what concerns they have. It’s worth seeing if they can make a case to my GLA colleagues and myself that we should amend our terms of reference for the investigation.

I very much hope that the Tories do not throw their toys out of the pram on this one. Firstly, it's ridiculous. The Tories amended the terms of reference at the Transport Committee that approved the scrutiny and then voted in favour of the scrutiny.

Secondly, what an earth would it look like to London if the Tories refused to examine parking enforcement? Lord knows they are always complaining about all restrictions and charges on motorists. A sudden desire to avoid the subject might look very suspicious.

Anyway - hopefully it will all be sorted. Judging from the amount of emails and correspondence flooding in - this issue has touched a nerve in London. And that is one of our functions at the London Assembly - to raise issues of concern to Londoners.

Today was the Met Police Commissioner's conference where senior bods in the Met (and the Metropolitan Police Authority) gathered to 'build on our success' – i.e. plot and plan the way forward.

Sir John Stevens gave his usual stirring story for boys (and girls) speech. He is an absolute master of rallying his troops and motivating them. He’s really more of a politician than most the politicians I know - and better at it.

Myself and local Haringey Commander, Stephen Bloomfield, got an honorary named mention for Muswell Hill police station (see my blog entry for 27 September).

There was much success for him. This included the new “Safer Neighbourhoods” program. Currently it applies in three wards in each London borough, putting six police personnel on our streets, ring-fenced from removal for any other policing purpose.

However, the roll-out of the program faces funding problems. And without a pan-London roll out, there’s a risk that crime is displaced to areas outside the scheme.

Next was a speech from the Chair of the MPA, Len Duval. I have a lot of time for Len - voted for him to be Chair in fact - and time is what you needed today. Len had been given a slot of 15 minutes. Now what you have to understand about the Met is it runs like clockwork to time (if only our rail system did the same). Len made good points - and then remade them - and then veered off at tangents - and then made them again. The upshot being that he overran his slot by about 25 minutes - thus throwing the whole schedule into disarray and losing his audience entirely. Hope someone close to him whispers in his ear for next time.

Labels: crime, mpa, muswell hill police station, stephen bloomfield

Hurrah! I am at Muswell Hill Police Station at the re-opening of the police front counter.

It has taken five and one half years to get it reopened - but today is the day.

It was a fabulous feeling to see the reality, to meet the volunteers who have been trained to help staff the counter, and to have the Met Police Commissioner, Sir John Stevens there to cut the ribbon.

It was good to hear him reiterate the importance and significance of the police station in our community. The local police commander, Stephen Bloomfield, also positively beamed with pleasure at the way things have got better in Haringey.

It is both his and Sir John's real commitment to community policing and engagement which - added to our long campaign and the community's support - delivered the wonderful occasion today.

Even Sir John allowed both himself and his uniformed officers to have a glass of champagne. The Met is really chilling out...

Labels: muswell hill police station, stephen bloomfield

Met with Sharon Shoesmith, Director of Education at Haringey Council. Wanted to float a couple of ideas with her as well as getting updates on some key Haringey education issues.

The TUC are planning to sell their education centre in Crouch End. My fellow councillors in Crouch End have been pushing for it to be considered as a possible site for a new school. The good news is that this is now happening and a feasibility study is about to be published.

Also asked about the situation on school places for local children in Muswell Hill. The planning mess at Haringey meant that this year something like 40 children were unable to go to school anywhere near where they lived. I am assured that planning is well advanced and more sophisticated than has been the case to date. We'll see.

One of the ideas I raised with her was the issue of pupil behaviour near schools. A few months ago I went to see the Head of Highgate Wood School about this. I often get complaints from residents around schools (not just this one) about the behaviour of pupils. I wanted to see how the school and local community could work together on the issue.

The Head suggested I follow up the idea through the LEA (local education authority) and Haringey Council channels. I’d heard nothing from them for some time, but the Director said she would follow up on this and let me know where the idea had got to.

My 'big' idea (well - the brilliant idea sent to me by a local resident) was to find if there were any retired teachers in Haringey who would like to help children with their homework after school in libraries. The person who had the idea was herself a retired teacher.

I thought this was brilliant – it would help children, help libraries and help retired teachers who still wanted to be active in this way. So I put this to Sharon Shoesmith, who liked the idea very much.

She suggested that instead of libraries - which might be difficult - the venue should be the after school clubs. This would make easier the police checks which have to be carried out on anyone working with children as they are venues already covered by this work.

I said that I would see if we could find if there were any retired teachers out there who would like to come forward. We will see - but she was open and enthusiastic about it - which is a good start.

Back in London after the end of our party conference (and a great speech from Charles).

Yesterday presented the finding of my GLA transport committee’s investigation into road humps to a road safety conference. Today, my mind has turned to our investigation into parking enforcement in London again. Have noted that a couple of councils are a bit nervous about what we might find. Pressure has already been brought to bear to try and amend some of the terms of reference. Only thing I can say is that the louder someone squeals that the Assembly should keep it' nose out of their business - the more convinced I am that the issue needs looking at.

We shall see how this all develops. I hope that all the boroughs and organisations will comply with our request for written evidence. (You can let me have your views through my feedback form).

Big build up to the appearance and speech of Jody Dunn - who is our megastar candidate in the Hartlepool by-election which polls next Thursday. If rapturous welcomes mean anything - she'll storm Hartlepool. Perfect candidate - mother of four, studied to become a barrister after having children, fighting to save local hospital and winsome for the media too! Half Finnish, an ex-disc jockey and a fellow blogger - way to go.

Lying in bed watching BBC news. Blow me if they are not doing a whole package about parking as a result of the announcement of the London Assembly’s investigation into parking enforcement in London.

I telephone the Beeb to ask if they can give out a number or email as they say there are hundreds of people contacting them with stories of unfairness etc. By the time I get over to the conference centre and go down to my press officer - BBC at conference are onto it and I do a number of interviews, TV and radio about the scrutiny. It would seem that both London residents and the media are very exited about this one. If you’ve got views yourself – let me know through my feedback form.

Later in the day, I put in a card to speak in the policing debate. You never know if you will be called, but you have to be in the auditorium just in case. In fact, I am called straight after the motion has been moved. My speech is really about the need for local response from local police to local people. I go through some of the work I have done on trying to get the Met to set up a system of call answering phone calls to the police locally. Far too many people say they can't get through to their local police station at the moment. Finish on a happy ending - that our campaign to re-open Muswell Hill police station’s front counter has succeeded - Sir John Stevens (the Met’s top cop) is coming to do the honours on Monday.

Labels: muswell hill police station

Ken Livingstone announces that he will raise fares in London in the region of inflation + 20%. Lots of smoke and mirrors around peak hours and this and that - but bottom line - mega fare rise. And the bugger compounds this by stating that we can expect inflation busting rises for the next three years as well.

I do a rash of radio interviews on Ken's dishonesty and broken promises before the election about fare rises. Also cover issue of having the most expensive fares in the world already and this would drive people off public transport and back into their cars. The low paid worker can ill afford to live in London already - this will just be another nail in the coffin.

In the afternoon, big debate on the party's "pre-manifesto" document - Freedom, Fairness, Trust. Basically sets out the party's overall policy for the general election - though more details will be announced closer to the time. You can see the top ten points on our national website.

Labels: ken livingstone

Meet my aide for the conference debate I'm chairing at noon to have a first look at the cards in from representatives to speak. (People wanting to speak in our of the conference debates have to submit a card first - so the chair knows who wants to speak and can balance the debate between people for and against the different parts of the topic).

Lots of cards to choose from. The skill is to find the crux of the debate and hang the argument around that part of a motion or amendment. Then you need to balance the debate in proportion to the cards in, add geographic, gender, ethnic, and age balance and take any really convincing personal experience of the issue. As you can imagine on asylum - there were really lots of good points to be made.

I am always nervous about chairing at conference. Not only is the auditorium huge and fairly full and it is broadcast live on TV. The ultimate fear is that someone will call for a suspension of standing orders and whilst there are orders and procedures for every eventuality - remembering what they are under pressure is scary.

However, it all went relatively smoothly, with excellent speakers and to time. I had been told in no uncertain terms that I had to bring the debate in on time at 3.30pm exactly as I would be directly followed by a Q & A session with Charles K. Phew...

Having attended Conference Committee to iron out any wrinkles in the arrangements for the debate I will be chairing the next day (interesting notions like who's summating the amendments and what is the time split between mover and summator.) It doesn't get more riveting than this. Then off to the Purbeck Suite where I am speaking in the Transport for London (TfL) fringe on traffic in London. Peter Hendy and Bill Hamilton are there for TfL and Lord Bill Bradshaw is there to talk about the Traffic Bill. I am covering congestion charging.

TfL have laid on wine and food - so it's a good bet that the meeting will be well attended. As I walk into the room, my researcher tips me off that TfL are very cross with me as they've seen the speech I gave to the Institute of Civil Engineers the previous Thursday night.

I had merely pointed out that getting information out of TfL was akin to getting blood out of a stone, that they were anal retentive and that I kept coming up against the rubberised walls of TfL Public Relations. Having grabbed a glass of wine - I was ready for the attack. I disarmed them by saying I had heard that they were on the warpath - but that I stood by what I had said.

I suggested to Peter and Bill that I give them some examples of requests for information (details and dates) - so that they can track what happens their end. We will see if this prompts the answers I have been waiting so long for.

Then we got on with the debate which went really well (probably the wine) and the room was packed and there were lots of questions and comments - which always makes for a lively time.

Labels: peter hendy, tfl

Off to the Lib Dem Party Conference. Bournemouth here we come! It is pouring with rain as the train draws into town. The cabbie is very cheery about us and a special fan of 'Charlie' - they always are.

Unpack and grab a sandwich in the bar before rushing to some training – I’m chairing one of the conference sessions later in the week. To do so - you have to have been previously fully trained and at every conference that you attend you also have to attend an update session. That session will either be practising the advanced preparations or role-playing events that could happen during the debate.

It's a drag - but chairing can be quite hairy so everyone generally does turn up to do their bit. I will be chairing the Asylum and Immigration debate on the Monday.

Have done endless interviews about: my comments on the Mayor's dishonesty, the parking scrutiny and the West London Tram.

Today I go into the GLA for my wonderful PA's farewell lunch. Jeni has been absolutely fantastic and I will miss her.

Coming back into City Hall, I realise I have forgotten my pass. Blow me down - the security guard wouldn't let me through and made me go through the screening reserved for visitors rather than staff.

Full marks I thought - in a week that has seen a complete farce in the security mess that appears to surround our key terrorist targets - the House of Commons and Buckingham Palace.

Heavy duty Transport Committee meeting which I chair. We had Transport for London, Ealing Council and a couple of learned professors to answer our questions arising from our trip along the route of the West London Tram and from the evidence we had taken from local people and groups.

Whether we will be able to get a consensus on the committee for our report - who knows. I would like to think it possible - if we stick to evidence-based recommendations rather than political rant.

The second half of the session was devoted to the future of rail in London. Fairly gloomy would be my judgement. The Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) and Network Rail were our witnesses. Didn't sense any great shift in ATOC's position - other than they have learned to talk using the right words. Whether this has a flying chance of translating into more services for us poor Londoners...?

But the real excitement was a two second item as the committee agreed the terms of reference for a scrutiny on parking enforcement in London. With a couple of amendments this went through - and all media hell broke loose.

With all the reports in the press of unfairness, wayward clampers, overzealous wardens etc, it seems to me a good idea to look at what the truth is - are the reports accurate or exaggerated?

Needless to say the boroughs are concerned that we are looking into their business (and a very good business as far as I can tell) and I haven't heard what Transport for London (TfL) think yet. But what I do know, is that if enforcement has become 'unfair' then ordinary, decent folk start feeling angry and upset that life is becoming impossible - and unfairly so.

And many people who use public transport whenever they can - still at times use a car for journeys that are not covered or possible by public transport. And other journeys are really necessary for the disabled and other vulnerable people.

If parking regulations and enforcement are about resolving traffic problems and keeping proper flows and rationing scarce space - that's great and quite right that money raised from them should be spent on improving traffic and transport in that borough. However if things have gone too far and this has turned into simple revenue raising - it is not alright.

Admittedly, boroughs have an incentive to bring in parking revenue as it is virtually their one funding stream that Gordon Brown and the Treasury cannot nick back. Other profit that a council might make is then deducted from their normal grant from Government - which may be the source of some of these issues.

But we are also looking at the plethora of times and signage, etc, that confuse residents as they pick their way through the minefield as well. No-one is as well-placed as the boroughs to design their own schemes to suit local needs and local people. However, just as we did with trying to look at the myriad of different boroughs approaches to Blue Badge holders - so we hope to be able to help flag up some issues for the boroughs to then hopefully work on.

Labels: tfl

An early start to Mayor's Question Time as Ken has to leave for Moscow at 10.50am.

He starts in good form - but as the thrust of the first question begins to bite suffers his normal deterioration in humour. The question itself is about an area in Spittalfields where the proposed route of CrossRail would mean building a ventilation and emergency shaft in the middle of a densely populated area with narrow streets.

Everyone is concerned about the well-being of this community.

Ken finally loses his cool with me. So no change there after his summer break!

We go onto a question about finances. There is a looming half billion hole in the Mayor's budget. I'm highly suspicious that his intention will be to fill as much of it as necessary by digging into Londoners' pockets by increaseing fares and his share of Council Tax bills (called "the precept") in due course.

With Ken having just been re-elected, this is his "safe" period when he feels he can do as he pleases - with one election out of the way and the next a long time away. He informs us that he will make an announcement on his proposed fare increases next Tuesday at his press conference.

We had been informed earlier this morning that he has cancelled his visit to the LibDem conference due to - as his office put it - an 'emergency crisis budget meeting'.

I challenged him on his dishonesty pre-election when he promised time and time again when the fares were raised last January that he would peg the price of tickets to inflation.

This will clearly be broken next week and - given our fares are the highest in the world and the cost of living in London is making it a nightmare for key workers and the like - this is going to make things worse. Let alone making a nonsense of the benefits of the congestion charge in reducing traffic - when the fare hike could send people back into their cars.

I accused him of telling porky-pies and received a rebuke for using such langugate. Mind you, "porky pie" was mild compared to what I would have liked to call him!

We moved onto the 'emergency budget crisis meeting'. Ken laughed (as he does) and said it was simply a meeting with Transport for London to determine how the government's grant would be spent - i.e. which transport projects he would have to drop given that raiding all of our little piggy banks through fares still won't be enough to plug the hole and fund his wish list.

I rest my case - emergency crisis budget meeting was the right terminology.

Labels: ken livingstone, tfl

Whole day of interviewing for new Chair of the London Transport Users Committee. One more day of it go on Wednesday - when we have to make our decision. Watch this space…

Rush home from day's interviewing to pick up car to go to a weekend Liberal Democrat election summit. Fantastic location for me - I dislike driving myself, but because it was virtually on the A1 and the A1 is near me - I did it easily. I am a slow driver - but even at my pathetic top speed I arrived there in an hour.

Fantastic venue - really well set up for training needs and the staff were kind and helpful too. The weekend is packed with sessions. I don't think I would be talking out of school if I said that I had spent the weekend in nervous state having been asked to give one of the two after-dinner speeches on the Saturday night.

The letter I had received from our campaigns department simply stated that the speech should be 10-15 minutes and 'light-hearted'. I can do speeches on my portfolio subjects without a blink - but the idea of having to be funny or entertaining to my peers scared me to death. Thankfully – went down well.

Returned home on Sunday, full of beans and raring to go. Hartlepool is looking good (good to our candidate Jody is blogging too!) and there is a really buzz about our prospects at the general election when it is called.

Off to Uxbridge to meet other members of the London Assembly’s Transport Committee where I am taking them along the entire route of the proposed West London Tram.

The project director from Transport for London and other officers join us too.

Two hours to get to Uxbridge station where we are meeting - but the sun is shining.

I'm not giving a blow by blow account of our four and a half hour exploration by foot and mini-bus of the route - suffice to say a tram would be a wonderful addition and benefit to some areas and some parts of the route. But there are real problems elsewhere with the proposed route.

The real hot spots were plain to see as we stood in Acton High Street - which would be closed to traffic and where the side roads, which would take the displaced traffic, were too tiny really. Along the route there are also questions of the roads being too narrow and the damage to businesses. In total, around 27,000 cars travel the route and would get displaced by the tram.

It’s a very tricky issue – a scheme can be a good idea in general, but if the particular route selected doesn’t work, then that’s that – it shouldn’t go ahead.

Good news is that we have Professor Goodwin - a renowned expert on traffic dispersal – coming to the Transport Committee to give us his views. I hope we can get some real answers to help with judging this balancing act.

Labels: tfl

Very bizarre experience. I had a meeting arranged with a woman who had emailed me. She had discovered, she said, the solution to all the problems of London's buses. She had been unable to get through to the Mayor or Peter Hendy (Director of Surface Transport, Transport for London) – so asked if I would see her and perhaps support her ideas.

I get a fair number of contacts from people who say they have a great transport idea which they can’t get people interested in. I try to see people whenever possible - but they usually give me an idea of their idea - so to speak. She wouldn't. It was a secret.

She had said that she was wary of telling anyone her idea in case they 'stole' it and she wanted to own the commercial rights to her idea. In the end I agreed to a meeting and she came into City Hall to my office.

When we met, the first thing she said was that she had brought along a 'non-disclosure agreement' for me to sign. Whilst I am perfectly happy to keep a confidence if someone in that situation wants to be assured that I won't pass on an idea - I certainly don't believe in elected politicians signing anything that might prevent openness and accountability.

She said that she couldn't tell me her idea without my signing this document. I said that I was sorry that it would seem, therefore, to be a wasted journey on her part. I had been quite clear about this before the meeting was arranged.

It was all quite pleasant and well-behaved - but certainly bizarre. I explained to her that she really did need to see Peter Hendy or Livingstone if she wanted to 'sell' her idea to them and wished her well.

Of course, I am still curious about what the idea is!

Labels: ken livingstone, peter hendy, tfl

Rush back to Haringey for the hearing into an appeal over a controversial backlands development in Hornsey. The developers are appealing over the rejection of their plans. In my view, their plans are a dreadful proposal, which would stuff huge houses on a bit of land that falls between the back gardens of a triangle of houses.

The permission was refused - but as ever - developers don't give up - so the appeal was this morning.

I’ve got a busy diary today so Benji - one of the key organisers of the protesters, kindly says he will try and get me in early so I can give my evidence.

I had been to Mayor Livingstone on this and got his agreement that this was the type of development which he doesn’t approve of as it doesn’t provide affordable housing nor is the sort of sustainable development which we need.

But it looks like a no-show all round with neither the Planning Inspector nor council officers turning up on time. I hang around for a fair while, but with no sight of them – have to make my move to next meeting. Think the inspector was ill in the end – though would have been good if information had got to everyone waiting sooner!

Labels: ken livingstone

The GLA Transport Committee’s meeting about the West London Tram commences and I welcome the groups - some from Southall, Acton, Ealing, Shepherds Bush as well as some general contributors from organisations like GLAD, Transport for All and the London Civic Forum.

Have to say it was one of the most fascinating meetings I have chaired. The groups were there to inform the members of the committee of their concerns so that when we sit in formal committee on 16th September, we will be able to question Transport for London who are coming before us and put to them all the key issues raised.

I gave each speaker five minutes and then the committee asked that person questions. The really key issue is fears from residents about traffic displacement if a new tram gets the go ahead.

In the case of the original Central London congestion charge – Transport for London’s traffic forecasts only showed a very small percentage increase in traffic in the areas surrounding the charging zone. There was a lot of scepticism at the time – even some scare stories that the world as we know it would end in gridlock on 17th February 2002. But, once Congestion Charging started, it turned out that TfL’s model was right.

For the tram, TfL’s models show that where the tram displaces traffic, it could result in increases of traffic of up to 25% in places - so this time the fears of residents may well be right. Even if there is an overall reduction in traffic caused by the tram (which would be good), this level of displacement could cause really serious problems in those areas.

Obviously we will look at the modelling and there will undoubtedly be robust questioning on this issue. But what the 25% increase – if it happens – really means. An increase from one car an hour on average down a road to one and a quarter would mean fears are misplaced. But an increase from a much higher level could cause real problems of bottle-necks, stationary traffic etc.

Clarification on this is absolutely vital, but the information we’ve had so far isn’t clear. Something to pursue in our questioning!

There are also big issues over how the consultation has been carried out, how the tram would integrate with other forms of transport and the impact in particular areas; e.g. the plans currently would involve the closure Acton High Street.

Later this week we are going to examine the Croydon tram and walk/ride the proposed route - from Shepherds Bush right along to Uxbridge.

Labels: tfl

I am chairing a meeting tonight - an informal meeting of the Transport Committee. We are hearing from numerous groups representing a range of views on the Mayor's proposals for the West London Tram (WLT). This is causing huge controversy in West London and the Transport Committee is trying to ensure that all the concerns are heard and addressed by Transport for London who are consulting on the proposed routes.

Labels: tfl

Back in the office. Having spent the previous four days answering holiday mail and emails from my home address - log on with dread. Spend the day responding to any outstanding correspondence and attempting to reduce size of inbox.