While 2016 might seem a long way off, I think there are some clear advantages for Labour in selecting a candidate at least a year ahead of the City Hall race:

1) The chance to use the 2015 General Election to introduce their candidate to the electorate. The most widely talked about potential runners are well known to the Westminster lobby but how many voters outside their constituencies have heard of Sadiq Khan or David Lammy? 


2) Allowing Londoners to see that their candidate is so serious about winning City Hall and so committed to London as a whole that they passed on seeking (re)election to Parliament in order to concentrate on the 2016 race.


3) Creating pressure on Boris Johnson to confirm his own future plans. 

Many expect Boris to seek election to Parliament in or around 2015, but the presence of a Labour candidate ahead of that time would force him to confirm his plans once and for all. 

It’s not just Londoners and the media who’d want to know Boris’s plans, potential Tory runners would want to know whether it’s worth suiting up for the nomination race.

Yet the talk inside London Labour is of waiting until after the General Election “to see who comes forward” and that “the focus has to be 2015.“

The first of these sounds like code for “seeing who isn’t lucky in 2015” and offering them a bauble to make amends.

Yet, as I’ve said before, Londoners deserve someone who really wants to be their Mayor, not for the role to be treated as a consolation prize for failing to be re-elected to Parliament or missing out on a ministership.

City Hall isn’t an extension of the House of Lords.

The second refrain is often accompanied by the arrogant pronouncement that 2016 is Labour’s turn and an implied suggestion that it doesn’t really matter who runs because the party will be a shoo-in after 8 years of Boris.

Advocates of this position seem to think any old generic manifesto and a few barbs at the (probably) departing Mayor Johnson will see A.N. Other coast into City Hall on the back of Ed Miliband’s charisma.

I think taking Londoners for granted, and falling into the trap of thinking London is their city, could be disastrous for a party which has won just one of the four Mayoral elections held to date.

If London were the inherently Labour city some claim, Ken Livingstone would be marking his first year back at City Hall.

While his detractors claim Ken lost the election entirely due to his own brand of “toxic politics” and that another candidate would have done better, the truth is that serious big hitters chose not to run for Labour’s 2012 nomination because they were afraid they couldn’t beat him.

Is the same cowardice at play here?

Are some hoping to put off the nomination until after the General Election in case, post their selection, Boris suddenly announced he intended to run for a third term? It’s easy to imagine so.

Either way, unless they work hard to show Londoners that the Mayoralty and the capital’s unique issues really matter to them, I think there’s a real danger for Labour that a Tory candidate, shepherded around London by a still popular Boris, will be the one claiming victory in May 2016.

The London Assembly is questioning the Mayor on Wednesday. Image: MayorWatch

Mayor Boris Johnson is appearing before the London Assembly on Wednesday for the first Mayor’s Question Time session since March.

Assembly Members will question the Mayor for around two and a half hours on a range of topics arising since they last met.

Tabled questions include benefit savings from the living wage, the costs of Crossrail, the Mayor’s representations to Government ministers on tax and benefit changes and the estimated cost of hosting 2022 Commonwealth Games.

Full agenda papers including a list of priority questions can be found on the City Hall website.

TfL has written to local papers advising how to obtain an Oyster refund.

The letter, expected to be published by the papers over the coming days and reproduced below, has been issued in the name of Shashi Verma, TfL’s Director of Customer Experience.

It follows reports that Londoners and visitors to the capital have more than £53m tied up in unused Oyster cards.

TfL has previously promised to make the refunds process “easier”.

As part of its changes, Oyster holders will soon be able to get a refund at their local Tube station regardless of the payment method used. Currently only cash top-ups can be refunded at stations.

TfL’s letter to local newspapers: 
We encourage anyone who does not intend to use an old Oyster card to return it for a refund. The steps involved in doing so are easy.
 
Contact us on 0343 222 1234 and we will transfer the deposit and any outstanding balance into your bank account on return of the card.
 
Refunds can also be given at any London Underground ticket office if cash has been used to top up the Oyster card. Later this year, we will also be able to process all refunds regardless of the payment method used, at ticket offices.
 
The best way to keep track of your Oyster balance is by setting up an Oyster Online account at www.tfl.gov.uk/oyster.
 
I would also like to reassure everyone that every pound of our income is reinvested in improving the journeys our customers and road users make.
 
Shashi Verma
Director of Customer Experience
Transport for London

Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, Stephen Greenhalgh
and Met Deputy Commissioner Craig Mackey.

The current Scotland Yard building in Victoria is to be sold off as part of the Met’s and Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime’s (MOPAC) efforts to save £500m over the next three years.

The Met says moving from the current building and disposing of other underused buildings will allow it to save £60m in running costs.

Other measures in the Met’s plans to cut expenditure include closing 136 police front counters and abolishing local specialist crime units. The force is also reducing the number of officers who hold the rank of Sergeant and above.

City Hall says the reforms, the biggest re-organisation of London policing in a generation, will allow Mayor Boris Johnson to preserve front line office numbers while meeting the challenge posed by reductions in the UK government’s grants to London.

The Met’s new HQ.

The building was originally constructed as an extension to the Met’s second HQ, now known as the Norman Shaw buildings and used as offices for MPs.

On Monday Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, Stephen Greenhalgh and Met Deputy Commissioner Craig Mackey visited the building to launch the competition.

Architects have until June 27th to submit expressions of interest after which a shortlist will be drawn up. The final design will be announced in October with the Met expected to move into the new building in 2015.

Speaking to MayorWatch, Deputy Mayor Greenhalgh promised his office would put in place “all the control mechanisms to make sure we stick to budget” and deliver the promised savings.

Deputy Commissioner Mackey added that the Met was “absolutely focused on making sure we get value for money” for Londoners. 


Asked if there was a danger of the Met’s head office functions outgrowing the new, smaller building, he said it was “highly unlikely” they would need more HQ space in future.

He added: “The reality is nowadays there are somethings which are location specific and I think the Metropolitan police will always need some sort of footprint right in central London. But a lot of the things we currently do in some of our central London buildings could just as easily be done in any one of the 32 boroughs across London.”

Both Mr Greenhalgh and Mr Mackey said they wanted architects to consider the issue of public accountability and transparency as part of the design process. The new design is also required to retain the world-famous revolving Scotlan Yard sign.

Image: LFEPA

UK Government ministers asked Sir Ken Knight, himself a former London Fire Commissioner, to review the potential for efficiencies and operational reforms to fire and rescue services across England.

His final report, which was published on Friday, says fire brigades have failed to change despite a notable reduction in the number of fires over the past decade.

In London the number of fires has fallen to its lowest level since records began in 1966 according to London Fire Brigade statistics.

The Brigade also says the number of hoax phone calls it receives has fallen by 83 per cent over the last ten years.

The report says the fall in fires “suggests that there is room for reconfiguration and efficiencies to better match the service to the current risk and response context.”

It also notes that spending varies significantly between England’s 46 fire authorities, with some spending “almost twice as much per person per year” than other areas but states “there seems to be little relationship between expenditure and outcomes.”

The report also questions the need for having separate fire authorities and suggests creating a single service for the whole of England, as has happened in Scotland.

Other recommendations include introducing efficiencies in budgets and staffing and greater involvement of the private sector, a suggestion the Government has already rejected.

Responding to the report, London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson suggested the capital had made greater progress than other brigades in modernising the service.

The London Fire Brigade has already reformed shift patterns and is currently consulting on a new Draft London Safety Plan which would reduce the number of fire engines and stations to match current and projected demand.

Mr Dobson said: “Many of the recommendations in Sir Ken’s report have already been implemented in London and as a result we have made significant savings of £66 million since 2009. 

“Savings have been made on non-operational staff, including reducing our senior management structure, without making any reduction in the number of firefighters. We have introduced shared service working with some office based staff and our reserves have been reduced from a total of £65 million in 2007 to around £11 million in general reserves today.”

The closures contained in the Draft London Safety Plan have attracted criticism from politicians and the Fire Brigades Union.

However Mr Dobson said he was “confident we can make the savings proposed in the draft London Safety Plan whilst continuing to keep Londoners safe.”

He added: “Preventing fires before they happen is our priority and our commitment to community safety work will continue, including our successful home fire safety scheme, which sees around 70,000 free smoke alarms fitted each year.”

The Assembly says a rise in the number of continuous cruisers is creating tension within the boating population, and between boaters and those who live near to mooring sites. 

Initial research shows many boaters in the capital are having difficulty finding the moorings they want and there are reports that some are not observing canal rules, overstaying the visitor period and creating air and noise pollution from stoves, engines and generators.

The investigation will be led by Jenny Jones AM, on behalf of the Assembly’s Environment Committee, and will look at ways to alleviate these problems.
 
Jenny Jones AM, said: “As house prices in London escalate even further, some people may think that living on a boat on one of the capital’s waterways is an attractive alternative.
 
“However, there are considerable pressures on moorings and we have heard that in some parts of the capital, overcrowding and pollution is causing tension within the boating population, and between boaters and local communities.
 
“We need to find out if London’s waterways can cope with the growing demand and how they are being managed so everyone is able to enjoy the capital’s rivers and canals.”
 
The investigation is keen to hear from boaters, local communities and others about any issues they are facing. To find out more about how to contribute, visit www.london.gov.uk/moorings

The Mayor already controls the London Overground service. Image: MayorWatch

The paper reports that the departure of transport secretary Justine Greening and her replacement by Patrick McLoughlin has seen civil servants take “advantage of the change in leadership to push for the plan to be abandoned.”

The Mayor has previously suggested savings of £100m could be made over 20 years if ministers back his plans, money he says could be used to improve stations and services.

Speaking last year the Mayor said Londoners “deserve far better service than the current franchises deliver”.

The London Overground, controlled by the Mayor through Transport for London, has seen passenger numbers and satisfaction levels soar since it replaced the Silverlink Metro service in 2007.

Mr Johnson’s calls for greater devolution have been backed by the Assembly and passenger watchdog London TravelWatch which also wants City Hall to have a greater role in setting National Rail fares.

A spokesperson for the Mayor told City A.M.: “Discussions with the government are continuing and the success of the London Overground management contract shows what can be achieved.”

TfL bosses, who have claimed thousands of pounds on taxis, trains, magazine subscriptions and meals, are entitled to a medical plan as part of their renumeration packages.

In response to a Freedom of Information request, TfL has admitted the cost of the plan also “includes benefits available to family members (spouse/partners) and child dependents of chief officers”.

Since 2009 taxpayers have paid more than £49,000 to provide the plans.

The FoI response also confirms that all current chief officers are in receipt of a free all-zone Oyster card which can be used “on all modes of transport operated by TfL.”

Despite receiving free travel, TfL bosses have claimed thousands of pounds of taxi rides on expenses.

Last year transport commissioner Sir Peter Hendy claimed more than £2,500 on taxis and has claimed a further £800 in the first three months of this year.

TfL has previously defended the claims, saying Sir Peter “is overseeing the delivery of a ten-year multi-billion pound budget to manage transport in London, and also deliver Crossrail and the upgrade of the Tube and there are occasions when his full schedule and late hours necessitate the use of taxis”.

It also insists: “All expenditure within the organisation is carefully assessed to ensure it is essential to providing a safe, efficient, extensive and reliable transport network including expenses incurred by Chief Officers who often are called upon to travel out of the capital on business and attend conferences and other out of hours business related activities.”

Expenses claims which passed TfL’s internal “essential” expenditure test include magazine subscriptions, WiFi access and coffee mugs.

The FOI response also shows that all but one chief officer has claimed a nominee Oyster card, providing another adult at their main address with free travel across the TfL network.

The nominee pass is available to all TfL staff, but both Liberal Democrat and Conservative Assembly Members have called for it to be scrapped.

Last November the Mayor defended the nominee pass saying the cost of providing it was “nil as the amount of travel is insufficient to require additional services to be operated to cope with it.”

In its FOI response TfL added that: “It is expected that Chief Officers, particularly, and all TfL employees and their nominees are encouraged to use the public transport system and when on it they are expected to act as ambassadors for TfL, help assist our customers and identify and resolve safety and security issues.”

According to TfL’s 2010/2011 annual report, chief officers joining the organisation are also entitled to “recompense for loss of benefits from previous employers” arising from their decision to change jobs.

TfL’s ‘perks culture’ is at odds with the example set by Mayor Boris Johnson and London Assembly members who have significantly reduced their expenses claims.

In the most recent financial year the Mayor claimed just £107 on taxis, while a majority of Assembly Members made no expenses claims during the same period.

Although the Mayor and Assembly Members are also entitled to a free Oyster card to help them carry out their duties, they are not entitled to a nominee pass. And, unlike their TfL counterparts, City Hall staff have no entitlement to free travel.

The report has been published by the London Finance Commission which was established by Mayor Boris Johnson under the chairmanship of LSE academic and local government expert Professor Tony Travers.

It calls for an end to ad hoc Government grants for specific projects in favour of greater local control and democratic oversight of tax collection and spending.

Joining Prof. Travers at the report’s launch were Mayor Johnson and Mayor Jules Pipe, leader of London Councils, the group representing the capital’s 32 borough councils and the City of London.

Under the proposals the Mayor and councils would control all property related taxes – including council tax, stamp duty land tax and business rates – ensuring they had a guaranteed income stream to fund investment in new projects.

Professor Travers said: “Wales and, in particular, Scotland are moving towards far greater discretion over taxes. London should be treated similarly.”

He added that the proposals were financially neutral as central Government grants would be reduced “pound for pound” to match the money gained under the reforms.

Any increase in the capital’s overall pot of money would be driven by economic growth, although Travers warned the reforms would also mean the capital coping with less if the economy slowed.

The report also calls for a relaxation in borrowing limits to allow investment in new in captain projects.

Mayor Pipe said it was essential to move on from an aversion to public sector borrowing and recognise the role it had in enabling specific projects which delivered a sustainable legacy.

Welcoming the report, Mayor Johnson said: “This excellent report sets out the case for a fairer deal for Londoners, one that gives residents and businesses a closer say over where their hard-earned taxes are spent.

“It recognises the acute need for London to be able to better plan and finance the infrastructure needed to prosper and maintain a great quality of life, in the face of a decade of expansion.”

Mr Johnson added: “Crucially, we can see that providing London with fiscal freedoms does not come at the detriment of other regions but can in fact help London to generate more jobs and growth across the country.”

London Assembly members have also backed the report’s recommendations.

Labour’s John Biggs AM said: “These proposals are very welcome and recognise the need to develop London government’s role in deciding the future of our great city. We need to be given the flexibility to invest in areas that are important to Londoners, including housing and business investment.

“By granting London the ability to control its property taxes and lifting the highly restrictive borrowing limits we can get growth going in our city. We can invest in the infrastructure that we need, strengthen London’s democracy and improve the accountability of its representatives.”

Liberal Democrat Stephen Knight also welcomed the report but called on Mayor Johnson to make “proper use” of existing powers “instead of just waiting for a new settlement between the Exchequer and London”.

The report has also been supported by the capital’s business community and campaigners at the Taxpayers’ Alliance.

Baroness Jo Valentine, Chief Executive of business group London First, said: “We agree that London government should retain a greater proportion of the taxes raised in London at levels broadly consistent with current spending. Where further functions are devolved, so too should be tax revenues.

“It’s time to free the Mayor from having to spend his time lobbying central government, and going cap in hand to the Treasury, when he should be focused on positive actions to bring in investment and growth.”

Matthew Sinclair, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “The current situation where local politicians are responsible for spending money but not for collecting it through taxation encourages irresponsible behaviour.”

Mr Sinclair added: “London faces particular issues with property taxes. Stamp Duty on homes is a fundamentally flawed tax that causes enormous problems in London and should be abolished. Handing tax powers down from the Treasury should be seen as an opportunity to cut rates, not an excuse to fleece Londoners for even more cash. The Mayor’s progress in cutting his share of Council Tax shows what can be achieved and international evidence certainly shows that devolution leads to better local government and lower overall taxes.”

Prof. Travers and Mayors Johnson and Pipe say they will now lobby ministers and politicians from all parties to ensure the report’s recommendations are implemented.

The tests were carried out by at800, a new body set up by the UK’s mobile networks to assess the impact the new services will have on TV signals across the UK.
 
at800 say the positive results reflect the “very strong digital terrestrial television signal in London”.

Earlier this year telecoms regulator Ofcom auctioned spectrum capacity on two separate bands – 800 MHz and 2.6 GHz.

The lower frequency 800 MHz band is part of the ‘digital dividend’ freed up when analogue terrestrial TV was switched off and is said to be ideal for widespread mobile coverage.

at800 Chief Executive, Simon Beresford-Wylie said: “London is a big and important market for 4G services and also has millions of Freeview viewers. Clearly it was essential for the broadcasters and the mobile operators that we run trials in London before a rollout of 4G at 800 megahertz.

“Whilst it seems unlikely that there will be issues for the vast majority of television viewers in the capital, we will remain alert to any possible interference when rollout commences.”

The Mayor was joined in Wimbledon by local London Assembly Member Richard Tracey

Londoners and residents in the south east of England are being invited to give their views on two proposed options:

Metro – a high frequency underground service operating between Wimbledon and Alexandra Palace via an underground railway.

Transport for London say this option would relieve congestion on trains and platforms on the Northern, Piccadilly and Victoria lines.

Regional – a combined underground and overground railway operating from Alexandra Palace and stations in Hertfordshire to various locations in south west London and Surrey.

The consultation runs until August 2nd and can be completed online at www.crossrail2.co.uk.

Launching the consultation, the Mayor said: “Crossrail is set to revolutionise travel in the capital, and with a predicted 10 million people expected to be living in London by 2031, pressing ahead with the next stage of the plan, Crossrail 2, is quite simply essential.

“That’s why I am sending out a rallying cry for the public’s support for this consultation – come and share your views so we can progress with Crossrail 2 as soon as possible.”

The scheme is supported by the capital’s business community which is expected to provide some of its estimated £16bn construction costs.

Baroness Jo Valentine, Chief Executive of business lobby group London First said: “Even with the major transport programmes that are already planned or underway, by the late 2020s most tube and train carriages will feel like sardine tins for much of the day.

“That’s bad for London of course, but as the capital is the engine room of the UK economy, it would be damaging to the country as a whole. We need everyone to get behind this project and make it happen.”

Former Transport secretary and Chairman of the Crossrail 2 Task Force for London First, Lord Adonis said: “I am glad to see the Mayor taking forward preparations for Crossrail 2. Now we need a credible funding plan embracing the public and private sectors, with a view to construction in the 2020s.”

The scheme has also been backed by members of the London Assembly.

Liberal Democrat Assembly Member Caroline Pidgeon described Crossrail 2 as “an exciting proposal which has the potential to not only regenerate many parts of London but also transform capacity and services on some of the most crowded sections of the underground and national rail.”

The Assembly’s transport committee says it will now examine the proposals to ensure they “are robust and provide the best outcome for all Londoners.”

Committee Chair Val Shawcross AM said: “The Assembly welcomes the launch of TfL and Network Rail’s consultation and will be carefully scrutinising the plans of those in charge to make sure that London gets the boost it deserves from this proposed new transport infrastructure.”  

Following the consultation a report will be presented to the Mayor of London in the autumn ahead of further, more detailed consultations.

Londoners are being warned against hiring illegal limos. Image: MayorWatch

Members of the the London Fire Brigade cut their way into the limo to demonstrate the challenges they face rescuing the occupants when the vehicles are involved in an accident.

Onlookers were told how the restricted, single rear door nature of vehicles could hamper rescue efforts, requiring firefighters to cut into the vehicle in order to evacuate passengers.

The demonstration was supported by London Ambulance Service, Transport for London, the Met Police and Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA).

Since 2012 the agencies have run 19 joint operations, carrying out 338 roadside checks and seizing 27 vehicles. A further 232 banned from being driven on public roads.

The car used during today’s exercise was seized by the Met for failing safety standards, when it was stopped it was found to be carrying 12 passengers despite only be licensed for 8.

Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson said the demonstration was “a great opportunity for the public to see our skills in action, and hopefully it will make them think twice about hiring an illegal limo.”

Sir Peter Hendy, London’s Transport Commissioner, warned that firms operating unlicensed vehicles could be shut down. He also said “illegal limousines present a real threat and danger to the safety of people who hire them.”

Londoners thinking of hiring a limo are being urged to ensure the operator is properly licensed and the vehicle is insured.

Heather Cruickshank, VOSA’s Operations Director said: “The majority of limousine operators are licensed and use their vehicles responsibly, but there is a sizeable minority that does not operate in this way – and the public must be alert to this risk.

“Only booking with licensed operators is the best way of minimising the risks to themselves and other road users – and helps send a clear message to those who chose to try and trade unlawfully.”

How the former broadcast centre will look on completion.

The broadband and phone giant has taken a ten year lease on part of the former Olympic broadcast centre, transforming it into a new state of the art base for its new channels.

Mayor Boris Johnson and the London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC), which is responsible for securing the park’s future, have both promised the site will deliver sustainable growth for the local area.

LLDC chiefs say the Mayor’s ambitions have been given a major boost by BT’s presence.

Speaking to MayorWatch at Thursday’s launch of the channels, Neale Coleman, Deputy Chairman of the LLDC, said: “Having an anchor tenant like BT here just transforms the prospects of this building.”

Mr Coleman said it was “notoriously difficult to find good uses for Olympic broadcast centres” but predicted BT’s presence would held secure the building’s future by making it more attractive to other “blue chip” companies.

He added that the LLDC was “fantastically optimistic” the site would be a “terrific generator of jobs”.

LLDC CEO Dennis Hone added that: “BT is an anchor for what we’re trying to achieve here”, providing 400 of the expected 4,000 jobs to be based on the site.

Local businesses are set to be the biggest beneficiaries of BT’s decision to set up base on the park after Jamie Hindhaugh, Chief Operating Officer at BT Sport, said “local suppliers are more efficient”.

He also said the area offered access to the “great talent” BT needed to realise its ambitions for the channels.

The capital’s fire authority, LFEPA, is currently consulting on a new draft safety plan which would allow the Brigade to reclaim the costs of attending false alarms. If the draft plan is approved, building owners would be charged £290 for each false alarm.

The Brigade says if the new charges were already in operation, the capital’s hospitals would have paid out almost £700,000 over the past 12 months due to more than 2,600 false alarms. Other top culprits include student halls of residence with 432 false call outs (estimated fines £112,320), airports (246, £63,960), college and universities (201, £52,260) and hotels (167, £43,420).

Fire commissioner Ron Dobson said: “Firefighters ought to be available to attend genuine emergencies or carry out training or community fire safety work, rather than attending thousands of false alarms. Often false alarms are caused by poor management or maintenance of alarm systems.”

The draft safety plan also includes proposals to close axe 12 fire stations and 18 engines.

Critics say recently published figures justify their concerns that the closures would increase response times in some areas.

In Clapham Town the time for the first engine to arrive would increase from 3mins 56s to 7mins 53s, and the second response time from 5mins 7s to 9mins 54s.

Earlier this week, Green party London Assembly Member Darren Johnson claimed: “A delay in response times can literally mean the difference between life and death.”

City Hall, the Fire Brigade and Assembly Members are all urging the public to take part in the consultation which is available online and runs until June 17th.

Investment in stations and staff have seen London Overground achieve high passenger satisfaction levels. Image: MayorWatch

Passengers numbers have grown by more than 160% since Transport for London took over the under-performing Silverlink service in 2007.

The service is consistently one of the UK’s best performing rail services and scores highly on passenger satisfaction league tables thanks to its modern trains and visible staffing.

The carriages will be built by Bombardier Trains in Derby and will allow the network’s existing trains to be increased from four to five carriages.

Today’s £88m order forms part of a previously announced £300m package to boost capacity, which will also see platforms extended to cope with the new, longer trains.

Confirming the order, Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, said: “London Overground has been a truly dazzling success and more and more Londoners are now using the vastly improved service.

“Not only will these new carriages help us meet passenger demand, but they will also support jobs and growth at their birthplace in Derby.”

TfL will buy 600 vehicles and pay the salaries of the second crew member. Photo: TfL

In September the TfL board agreed to purchase the buses, deviating from the standard practice of bus operators supplying their own vehicles.

Board members were advised that TfL’s mandated use of the buses and the inability to deploy them outside London meant accounting rules would require them to be considered TfL assets even if operators purchased them directly.

The average cost of each bus over the life of the contract, which runs until 2016, is £354,500.

TfL today claimed that the decision to bulk purchase the buses had allowed it “to get a lower unit price” than if operators had bought them directly.

However the announced price contradicts previous statements by Mayor Boris Johnson.

In October 2012, Liberal Democrat Assembly Member Caroline Pidgeon questioned the Mayor over industry speculation that the bus was “going to cost £330,000 each.”

In response Mr Johnson said: “the deal that we are able to do with Wrightbus will actually be considerably cheaper and better value for Londoners”.

In September 2009 the Mayor told Green party AM Jenny Jones: “If you look at the current cost of a bus, £250,000, roughly speaking, buys you a new bendy bus. We think that we can get a wonderful new bus for London which will be considerably cleaner, greener, lighter and exactly what this city needs for much less than that”.

TfL says the cost “includes inflation, technical upgrades and mandatory changes including the legal requirement to fit Euro 6 engines to all new vehicles from 2014.”.

However it excludes TfL’s estimated £37m bill for underwriting the cost of the second crew member needed to supervise use of the vehicle’s open rear platform.

In a statement TfL claimed the buses would produce “around four times less” PM and NOx emissions that “the fleet average hybrid bus, and 20 per cent less CO2”, but failed to provide specific emissions figures.

The first production buses will enter service later this year on route 24.

Each vehicle will remain in London for its entire working life, expected to be “at least” 14 years.

Announcing the purchase price, the Mayor said: “We will ensure these buses more than earn their keep over the next few years.  By keeping them in harness in the capital for the entirety of their useful life, we will be extracting every last drop of value out of them.”

Commenting on the announcement, Assembly Member Darren Johnson said: “The New Bus for London is an expensive vanity project which the next Mayor will abandon as an outdated and polluting waste of money. Londoners’ simply can’t afford the higher fares that will come from paying £37m a year to bus assistants whose only real job is to stop people falling off the rear platform when it is open.

“The reason why these buses will spend their entire life in London is because no one else wants them. That is also the reason why TfL have had to buy the buses themselves, at a premium rate, rather than let the operators have all the upfront costs and risks.

On the issue of emissions, Mr Johnson said: “The Mayor has boasted about the green credentials of these new buses, but they will all have to be retrofitted at the end of next year and made less polluting in order to keep up with the higher standards for all new buses being produced throughout Europe. The Mayor has also refused to come clean on the fuel consumption of the bus by publishing the on the road data they have.”

Mayor Boris Johnson has previously been accused of favouring both groups while pushing up fares for public transport users.

In defence of his policy of annual fares increases, the Mayor previously said it would be wrong to hold fares down before an election “and then whack them up cynically thereafter.”

However since the election the Mayor has announced two measures expected to see TfL take more from drivers entering the congestion charge zone and using the cycle hire scheme.

A doubling of cycle hire membership fees is expected to net TfL an additional £4-6m per year.

He has also confirmed changes to the congestion charge scheme which will see TfL receive a further £6m every year.

This figure includes £20.5m from a hike in the penalty for driving into the congestion zone without paying the charge, a change which carries “no cost to TfL.”

Recent TfL polling revealed that its decision to grant Barclays naming rights for the cycle hire scheme and it’s subsequent high profile pushing of the Barclays brand has backfired.

The association with the bank has lead “many” users to believe the scheme makes a profit for TfL while “most” users are unaware that the scheme is subsidised.

This perception is likely to be a key driver behind dissatisfaction with membership charge increases. In a separate survey of users, the price hike was the biggest reason given by the 20% of users not intending to renew their membership.

Last month Mayor Boris Johnson and TfL announced the current Greener Vehicle Discount (GVD) for less polluting vehicles would be replaced by a new Ultra Low Emission Discount (ULED) for zero or ultra-low emission vehicles.

As a result of the changes, vehicles such as the Toyota Prius and Fiat 500 TwinAir would no longer be exempt from the congestion charge, although drivers of vehicles already registered would continue to receive their discount for a ‘sunset period’ of three years.

A briefing prepared for the Mayor, and published this week on the City Hall website, says the change to the discount scheme will “result in additional Congestion Charging income of £2-3m per year.”

Two other changes to the congestion charge scheme are also expected to generate cash for TfL.

A decision to axe the option to pay the congestion charge in shops will save £600,000 per year, but will cost £1m to implement suggesting TfL may have to pay to exit contracts with suppliers.

Transport for London says only 6% of payments are now made over the counter.

Increasing the penalty for driving into the congestion zone without paying the charge from £120 to £130 is expected to “result in £20.5m extra net income over the Business Plan period 2013/14 to 2021/22, at no cost to TfL.”

Overall TfL expects to receive an annual increase of £5m-£6m as a result of the changes.

According to the briefing note, the changes were unpopular with members of the public and business who responded to a TfL consultation.

The proposal to scrap the GVD and introduce the new ULED was opposed by 59% of respondents, the decision to axe over the counter payments was opposed by 53% and increasing the penalty was opposed by 50%.

13% of respondents claimed the penalty charge increase was “an unjustifiable way of TfL raising revenue”.

The proposals received greater backing from stakeholder organisations, including bodies under the Mayor’s control and local councils, who were also consulted.

The Mayor’s briefing states that although the Greener Vehicle Discount (GVD), introduced by his administration in 2010 “increased the proportion of lower emission cars using the zone by around 30%,” it also “caused additional congestion valued at around £1.5m net in 2011.”

The report warns that if the current exemption remained in place, “up to 6,000 GVD eligible cars could be seen in the zone daily by the end of 2013”.

When the changes were announced, a City Hall spokesperson said they were “in line with the Mayor’s aim to improve air quality in London by reducing emissions from private vehicles”.

However the briefing says replacing the GVD with the Ultra Low Emission Discount is “likely to lead to a small reduction in air pollutant emissions” but that “the effect of the proposals would not be significant given the small size of the impact.”

Commenting on the briefing note, Simon Birkett, Founder and Director of the Clean Air in London campaign, said: “This new information shows again what a catastrophic mistake it was for Boris to incentivise the purchase of vehicles emitting carcinogenic diesel exhaust. Boris does not seem to understand the difference between greenhouse gases (e.g. carbon dioxide) and air pollutants that kill people and cause asthma in children and COPD in adults (e.g. dangerous airborne particles and nitrogen dioxide).

“Worse, by giving long notice of the changes and extending the sunset period for a year, Boris is encouraging a short-term surge in the sales of diesel vehicles. London needs fewer and cleaner vehicles and truly ‘technology neutral’ policies that consider air pollution holistically not just carbon dioxide.”

Jenny Jones, Green party member of the London Assembly, commented: “There was no mention prior to the Mayor being elected of these extra costs and increased charges. I have no problem with the Mayor making sensible changes, but I think that a lot of people will feel that Boris is hitting them in the pocket without any prior warning.”

Commenting on this report, John Mason, Transport for London’s Director responsible for Congestion Charging, said: “The objective of these changes is to make the Congestion Charge scheme greener and more efficient, not to raise revenue.

“Any net revenue from the Congestion Charge is reinvested directly into the capital’s transport infrastructure. We have clearly listened to concerns raised in the consultation, for example by extending the sunset period for people that will lose their discount.”

Darren Johnson has been elected Chair of the London Assembly.

The pair, who were both elected unanimously, have served at City Hall since the inaugural Assembly elections in 2000.

As Chair Mr Johnson will preside over meetings of the full Assembly and represent Assembly Members and Londoners at public events.

Mr Johnson said he would “seek to Chair Assembly meetings in a way that allows rigorous cross examination of the Mayor, allows the Mayor the opportunity to answer questions succinctly, and enhances transparency and accountability.”

He added: “Above all, while I am happy to facilitate rigorous democratic debate, I will also remember that the real strength of the Assembly is when we speak truth to power, united with one voice on behalf of Londoners.”

The election of Mr Evans follows complaints from the Assembly’s Conservative group that they were being unfairly excluded from the Assembly’s top jobs by the other parties.

Since 2000 the roles of Chair and Deputy Chair have largely been held by parties who do not hold the Mayoralty.

During Ken Livingstone’s 2004-08 term as Mayor the posts were shared by the Liberal Democrat and Conservative groups. Since the election of Mayor Boris Johnson in 2008, they have been held by Labour, Green and Liberal Democrat AMs.

The three groups have also shared the chairmanships of Assembly committees which hold the Mayor and his agencies to account, voting in a block to ensure Conservative AMs aren’t elected to the posts.

The Conservative group, the majority of whom where not on the Assembly during the 2004-08 term, say such deals are unfair as all AMs are elected to hold the Mayor to account on behalf of Londoners.

Private talks were held between all four Assembly parties in recent days to find a way of addressing Conservative complaints.

The parties eventually agreed to the election of Mr Evans as Assembly Deputy Chair and fellow Tory AM Gareth Bacon as Chair of the Regeneration Committee.

Speaking after the meeting, Mr Evans said: “There are strong and deeply held political differences among Assembly Members but I know from my 13 years at City Hall that we all share the same aim, making London the greatest city on earth.”

Research commissioned by the Assembly’s Transport Committee found some airports are using as little as 49% of available slots, suggesting there is sufficient capacity to meet growing demand for air travel.

Evidence presented to the Assembly suggests the use of larger aircraft would also allow airports to serve more passengers without further expansion. At Heathrow it’s claimed this could create capacity for an additional 20 million passengers every year.

The report says any move to encourage passengers to switch from Heathrow to airports such as Gatwick, Luton and Stansted would require improvements to rail and other transport modes.

Stansted Airport told the committee it could attract 1.5 million extra passengers annually if rail journey times from London were reduced from 45 to 30 minutes.

The Assembly hopes its report will inform the findings of the Government’s Airports Commission which is examining ways to improve the UK’s air capacity.
 
Committee chair Caroline Pidgeon said: “Evidence we received shows that the Airport Commission must examine whether better use of existing airport capacity could be an intelligent cost-effective alternative to building new airports or runways.

“Currently London sees 130 million passengers traveling through our airports each year. The challenge for the government and decision-makers is to find the best way to support the UK’s economy globally while ensuring Londoners are not adversely affected by worsening noise and air pollution from planes flying over the capital. 

“In the short term using existing capacity in a smarter way may be the most cost-effective solution.”

New stations will be built at Nine Elms and to Battersea. Image: TfL

Backed by Wandsworth and Lambeth councils, the extension would create a spur from Kennington serving new stations at Nine Elms and Battersea,

It is expected to act as a catalyst for jobs, investment and regeneration in the Nine Elms area.

TfL has submitted an application for a Transport and Works Act Order, kickstarting the statutory process during which individuals and organisations can make representations to Government about the proposed scheme.

This consultation period will last for seven weeks and will be followed in the autumn by a public inquiry. Ministers are expected to make a final decision by autumn 2014.

Michèle Dix, Managing Director of Planning for Transport for London, said: “Extensive public consultation has shown that the majority of local residents and businesses are behind this proposed Tube extension, which will create access to the Underground for thousands of people, as well as cutting journey times from the Battersea area to the West End and the City to about 15 minutes.”

Ravi Govindia, leader of Wandsworth Council and chair of the Nine Elms Vauxhall Partnership, said: “Bringing the Tube to Battersea has long been the ambition of this council and we are now within touching distance.

“This project is the key to unlocking Nine Elms on the South Bank’s full potential and delivering 25,000 new jobs and 16,000 new homes.”

If given the go-ahead, the project would be funded through a new £1bn loan from from the Public Works Loan Board, financed through business rates and a levy on developers.

Deputy Mayor of London Victoria Borwick announced the recipient organisations.

Shopmobility schemes help older and mobility impaired Londoners access local shops, ensuring they remain active and playing a part in the local community and economy.

The Greater London Authority purchased 76 of the scooters from Games organisers and is allocating them to both existing Shopmobility schemes and groups wishing to set up new schemes.

The move is part of the Mayor’s promise to deliver an Olympic legacy for all communities within London and complements other initiatives to increase London’s accessibility.

Announcing the recipients of the scooters, Deputy Mayor Borwick, said: “The Mayor recognised that many mobility services in London have been underfunded for a long time and he saw this as a great opportunity to do something to address that.

“These scooters made a huge difference to people last summer and it’s great news that they will now assist Londoners across the capital to get around more easily.

“Helping more people to get out and about so they can shop more easily will also give a boost to local businesses and high streets too. This project really is a great example of the Olympic and Paralympic legacy in action.”

Deputy Mayor of London, Victoria Borwick with some of the scooter recipients.

Recipients
Location                              Name of organisation

Bexley                                     Bexley Accessible Transport Scheme – 5
Camden                                   African Physical Training Organisation – 5
Camden                                   Passenger and Accessible Transport Services – 5  
Ealing                                     Ealing Shopmobility Scheme – 5
Harrow                                     Harrow Shopmobility Scheme – 6
Harrow                                     Age UK Harrow – 2
Havering                                 Havering Shopmobility Scheme – 4
Hillingdon                               Hillingdon Shopmobility Scheme – 2
Hounslow                                Hounslow Shopmobility Scheme – 2
Kensington & Chelsea              Out & About Scooters/Westway CT – 5
Kingston                                  Kingston Shopmobility Scheme – 3
Lewisham                                 Lewisham Shopmobility Scheme – 2
Merton                                     Merton Community Transport – Scootability Project – 6
Newham                                   SUBCO Trust – 2
Newham                                   Newham African Caribbean Resource Centre – 6              
Redbridge                                Ilford Shopmobility Scheme – 5
Sutton                                      Sutton Shopmobility Scheme – 5
Wandsworth                             Wandsworth Shopmobility Scheme – 6


These are the same claims (Jan-March 2013) that TfL refused just last week to provide under an FOI request. It did however provide details of older expenses claims, including Peter Hendy’s now infamous purchase of toy buses for Boris.

As an aside, one might have thought a man whose schedule is so packed he has to charge the taxpayer thousands of pounds for Taxis would be a bit too busy to engage in gift shopping for the Mayor.

His latest claims total £1,593.94, with Taxis again accounting for the lion’s share.

In a statement lamenting its inability to no longer stave off heralding its embracement of transparency, TfL claims: “All expenditure within the organisation is carefully assessed to ensure it is essential to providing a safe, efficient, extensive and reliable transport network including expenses incurred by Chief Officers who often are called upon to travel out of the capital on business and attend conferences and other out of hours business related activities.”

“Essential” is a curious way to describe claims for magazine subscriptions, coffee cups and £2.40 of internet use.

It’ll be interesting to see what impact routine publication has on the expenses TfL’s officer class claim in future. At City Hall, where a single claim costs the taxpayer £25 to process, the Mayor and Assembly Members have largely given up submitting claims.

TfL has yet to tell me how much it costs to process their expenses claims.

Let’s hope it’s less than City Hall’s internal costings, otherwise the £28.03 claim from Leon Daniels (reported salary £234,000) could have cost the taxpayer almost the same again in admin fees.

Named Sacrilege, the bouncy castle in question is a full scale replica of Stonehenge and was designed as a piece of “interactive artwork” for the London 2012 festival.

According to a Director Decision document recently published on City Hall’s website, it can “hold as many as 200 ‘bouncers’ at any one time”.

Sacrilege is off to the the West Kowloon Cultural District Authority meaning that, with a little bit of geographical slipperiness, Boris can add “bouncy castles to China” to his list of items London exports to their more common countries of origin.

TfL say claims of a surplus stem from a misunderstanding of its finances.

The latest credit report from Moody’s claims the capital’s transport body has “a budgetary surplus of GBP 890.6 million”.

The report has prompted the London Assembly Labour group to repeat calls for Mayor Boris Johnson to freeze fares.

TfL’s business plan predicts a fares increase each year until 2015, money it and Mayor Johnson say is needed to deliver vital service improvements for passengers.

However Val Shawcross, Labour’s transport spokesperson on the Assembly, says “Londoners are struggling with rising rent, fuel and childcare costs” and has called on the Mayor to “ease the burden and abandon his planned above inflation fare rise later this year.”

She added: “This report shows that the Mayor has the flexibility to, at the very least, freeze fares. I’m not surprised that he quietly published this report on his website late yesterday.”

TfL says claims of a large cash surplus are based on a “misunderstanding” of both the report and its own accounts.

Steve Allen, Managing Director of Finance, told MayorWatch:  “We do not have an £890m surplus. Every penny in TfL’s budget is allocated to be spent on running and improving London’s transport network.”
 
Mr Allen added: “TfL’s grant from Government, which funds both revenue and capital expenditure, is reported as revenue expenditure in the Moody’s report and therefore shows up as a revenue surplus.  However, most of this grant is used for capital expenditure.”

Current capital spending includes a major upgrade of the Tube network and the construction of Crossrail.

The report, which can be viewed on the TfL website, highlights TfL’s reliance on Government grants and “high borrowing levels“ to fund new projects, noting that “the need to provide services at politically acceptable prices limits the extent to which prices can be raised”.

The report, The Price of Gold, says the average price to see Mo Farah win gold in the men’s 5,000 metres was £333 while 58 per cent of people who bought a ticket for the Men’s 100m final paid more than £294 each.

Organisers of the 2015 European field hockey championships, 2017 Athletics world championships and 2017 Paralympic athletics world championships, all of which are due to be hosted in London, are urged to ensure their events are affordable to Londoners of all income levels.

Recommendations include ensuring ticketing arrangements are transparent, making a pledge on the minimum number of affordable tickets for medal sessions and allocating a minimum proportion of public tickets for each session.

The Assembly’s Economy Committee, which drew up the report, will also share its findings with the organisers of the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi and the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Rio.

Committee Chair Andrew Dismore AM says: “The 2012 Games were a fantastic spectacle and London should be proud of staging a hugely successful Olympics and Paralympic Games.

“However, for many ordinary people, the lack of available affordable tickets for certain sessions meant there was little chance of them being in the crowd to see their sporting heroes win gold. Given that ticket sales massively exceeded their target, this was a missed opportunity to reward those taxpayers who funded the Games and inspire a generation to participate in sport.

“We must learn the lessons from London Olympics and Paralympics if we are to host future sporting championships successfully and build on the amazing public support and goodwill demonstrated during the summer of 2012.”

The existing Greener Vehicle Discount (GVD) for less polluting vehicles is to be replaced by a new Ultra Low Emission Discount (ULED) which only the greenest zero or ultra-low emission vehicles will qualify for.

Drivers of vehicles such as the Toyota’s Prius and the Fiat 500 TwinAir will lose their exemption under the changes.

From July 1st only pure electric vehicles or those which emit 75g/km or less of CO2 and meet the Euro 5 emission standard for air quality will be exempted from the charge.

However owners of vehicles already registered for the GVD will continue to receive a full discount for a ‘sunset period’ of three years.

Mayor Johnson also confirmed that drivers would lose the ability to pay the congestion charge in shops. Transport for London says only 6% of payments are now made over the counter.

The penalty charge for driving in the congestion zone without paying the charge will increase from £120 to £130.

TfL has been consulting on the changes which were first announced in November.

Matthew Pencharz, the Mayor’s Environment advisor, said: “These changes are in line with the Mayor’s aim to improve air quality in London by reducing emissions from private vehicles and promoting the further development of low emission vehicles. 

“We want to encourage the continued development of these technologies, while also protecting the benefits to traffic flow in the centre of London that the charge provides.”

Poor performance has led barclays to reduce the sum it will pay TfL Photo: MayorWatch

The bank had promised up to £50m towards the loss-making £225m scheme, however poor performance has seen that sum reduced by £1.57m as of 31st January 2013.

The FOI response is the first time Transport for London has admitted to Barclays reducing the value of its sponsorship agreement.

Under its contract with the bank, TfL is committed to meet specified performance criteria and every six months invoices Barclays for the latest sponsorship instalment, less any specified reductions applicable “in the event of performance targets not being met.”

According to TfL’s response, “the assessment period for the deductions differs depending on the criteria. For instance, the service levels are assessed monthly whereas a milestone, such as the scheme launch date, would be assessed when due.”

Where the two sides are unable to agree on the size of application of a deduction they can refer the matter to independent mediation.

In its FOI response, TfL says: “The financial deductions made up to 31 January 2013 under the terms of the Barclays sponsorship agreement are £1.57m. This consists of £0.57m of Scheme Service Levels (KPIs) and launch targets and £1.0m Scheme Usage (Trip Total Target).”

According to TfL, since April 2012 all performance indicators have been met, implying that the penalties imposed relate to performance in the scheme’s first phase.

As of January 31st TfL had deducted £2.6m from scheme contractor Serco for failing to meet its obligations.

TfL told MayorWatch that “Performance Indicators (PIs) [are] set slightly higher for Serco than those agreed with Barclays” resulting in the company being penalised on 42 instances where TfL was not itself in breach of its obligations to the bank.

Performance measurements supplied by TfL reveal that Serco failed to meet targets for Terminal Availability each month between April and DEcember 2012. It also failed to meet daily minimum bike availability targets between May and November.

Last week we reported how internal TfL polling had found rising dissatisfaction with the hire scheme, with users complaining of poor bike and docking station availability.

In February Leon Daniels, Managing Director for Surface Transport at TfL, threatened Servo with “significant financial penalties” unless it reduce the number of empty docking stations.

Commenting on the FOI response, London Assembly Member Darren Johnson said: “Londoners have been taken for a ride with Barclays sponsorship of cycle hire and superhighways. Rather than getting an upfront £50m Barclays cheque towards cycling, Londoners are getting less than the Mayor repeatedly claimed and we are getting it on a drip feed.

“Barclays have got their name splashed all over town. Yet the Mayor has ensured that the local authorities who have  also put public money into the scheme get none of the recognition.”

Corgi produce the die cast models under licence from TfL. Image: Corgi

In January we reported that senior Transport for London executives had charged taxpayers thousands of pounds for taxis, magazine subscriptions, meals and internet use.

The single largest claimer of expenses was TfL Commissioner Sir Peter Hendy whose claims included more than £2,500 on taxis and travelling costs.

New figures covering claims made between 15th September and 31st December 2012 show that Sir Peter claimed a further £800 on taxis during the closing months of the year.

TfL repeated its defence of Sir Peter’s taxis use, stating: “He is overseeing the delivery of a ten-year multi-billion pound budget to manage transport in London, and also deliver Crossrail and the upgrade of the Tube and there are occasions when his full schedule and late hours necessitate the use of taxis (which, of course, TfL licenses).”

Sir Peter’s expenses also include £179.70 for “Die Cast Models of NBfL for Mayor”.

NBfL is TfL’s in-house abbreviation for the New Bus for London, the Mayor’s new bus which is due to enter regular service later this year.

According to a press release issued in October by die cast toy specialists Corgi, the company “has the exclusive rights from Transport for London to produce this bus in die-cast.”

The statement suggests fare-payers have picked up the tab for making the Mayor a gift of toys licensed by his own organisation, rather than the licensee providing them at no cost.

The toy buses do not appear to be listed in the Mayor’s public register of gifts and hospitality.

Answering an FOI from this site, TfL declined to provide details of expenses claimed after January 1st 2013. However these figures are due to be published online “within the next 4-6 weeks”.

Commenting on the latest expenses claims, Green party London Assembly Member Darren Johnson said: “Not only are Londoners paying massively over the odds for the New Bus for London, they are also being asked to pay massively over the odds for toy buses for Boris Johnson. An unbelievable waste of public money.”

Deputy Mayor for Policing Stephen Greenhalgh heads the MOPAC.

The complaint I hear most often from the Assembly side is that MOPAC works at a snail’s pace and takes an unacceptably long time to answer letters and correspondence, some of which is sent on behalf of constituents.

The accusation has been made by Assembly Members of all parties and raises its head once more in a new blog post written by Jenny Jones.

In her piece, Jenny says:

“The majority of my letters and questions to MOPAC have not received a response within his own twenty working day target. In fact, eleven of my requests have taken over 70 working days to get a response, the longest was 160 working days”

By happy coincidence Jenny’s article arrived in my inbox the same afternoon MOPAC answered an FOI request I’d submitted last month on this very issue.

(A big thanks by the way to the MOPAC team for providing a prompt, helpful response which included far more information than I’d asked for.)

The following table sets out how MOPAC sees the situation:

As you’ll have noticed, it’s a far rosier and happier picture than that painted by its critics.

MOPAC tells me that where it fails to respond within the 20 day deadline this is because “Assembly Member questions are often complex and require detailed information from the Metropolitan Police Service.”

So case closed and MOPAC in the clear? Not quite.

Jones is so certain of her case that she’s referred the matter to the Information Commissioner who now has the unhappy job of deciding between two very different accounts of MOPAC’s performance.