News
and articlesNews
and articles
Press release: 18 December 2002
Poorer areas in London will lose out on £139 million of government funds because the way poverty levels are measured is inadequate.
The London Assembly's Economic Development Committee has heard that money from the Government's Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF), aimed at regenerating local communities, is not being distributed properly across the UK. Government departments use the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000 to measure deprivation. However, concerns have been raised about the methodology on which the Index is based, and this has resulted in London not getting a fair share of the funding available.
One way of deciding how much money London gets from the NRF is based on the rating in the Index. The Committee is concerned that London is adversely affected because certain criteria are not included in the Index, such as crime and quality of people's physical environment. Members felt that the methods used to measure geographical access to services failed to reflect accurately access difficulties faced by many Londoners. Also, problems encountered by people who speak English as a second language, is not adequately measured in the Index.(1)
The Neighbourhood Renewal Unit is currently conducting a review of the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000. Members have resolved to contribute to the review to ensure that London does not continue to miss out on funding.
Mike Tuffrey AM, Chair of the Committee, said: 'We were alarmed to hear about the funding implications London faces because of inadequate criteria used in the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000. The Committee is currently investigating where regeneration resources are targeted in the capital. London must get a fair share of resources if we are going to lift people out of poverty and regenerate our communities.'
Notes to Editors
1. Other concerns highlighted by the Committee about criteria in the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000 include: · Housing data, which was found to be equally unreliable to crime data on the basis of the criteria applied. · The omission of long-term data from the employment Domain Index, on the basis that the data was not sufficiently robust or up to date. The employment data would fail to capture the major qualitative difference between an individual unemployed for six months and another unemployed for five years. · The use of scaled indices at ward level, which are not included at district level. This creates an anomaly because neighbourhood renewal funds are administered at district level. · The use of ward borough boundaries to determine indices, given that they vary greatly in size, and those with large populations do not allow the identification of small pockets of deprivation
Press release: 10 December 2002
The London Assembly will investigate how the public and private sectors can better respond to the needs of the wider community by increasing diversity in the workplace, encouraging volunteers and being more environmentally friendly.
The Assembly's Economic and Social Development Committee wants to ensure that companies and government agencies recognise that they have an important social and financial contribution to make to the regeneration of London's communities. There needs to be more emphasis on encouraging community awareness in every day business practices. In the past, the focus of corporate social responsibility has been for companies to get involved with external initiatives, such as serving on boards of regeneration agencies and offering volunteers to mentor in schools, rather than their day-to-day operations.
The objectives of the investigation are to:
* Determine the extent of the private sector's commitment to London's
regeneration, and recommend ways to improve its impact
* Consider how the public sector's mainstream operations can have a more
strategic impact on economic and social regeneration in London
* Examine whether the Greater London Authority and its functional bodies
consider the economic, social and environmental impacts of their activities and
implement corporate social responsibility strategies
Mike Tuffrey AM, Chair of the Committee, said: 'We want to ensure that business and government in London are taking this agenda forward. The concept of corporate social responsibility was highlighted at a national level in the May 2002 update report of the Department of Trade and Industry. The European Union has recently called for greater action on it. It's now time to take a good look at its impact at a regional level, with a view to developing it across London, particularly given the Mayor's ambitions in the draft London Plan.'
Press release: 29 November 2002
Fragmented funding systems mean London's community projects in greatest need could miss out on money for regenerating their areas. The London Assembly's Economic and Social Development Committee has heard that some community workers have difficulty in understanding the confusing and uncoordinated system for regeneration funding in the capital. Grants can be obtained from the London Development Agency, Central Government, European funds and local councils.
The Committee is investigating ways to help community groups in the capital obtain information about accessing money and resources for regeneration. Assembly Members want to ensure that regeneration funds reach those in greatest need. (1) Throughout the investigation, representatives from community-based groups have told Members that funding agencies are sometimes risk averse. They prefer to play safe and not to back new and untried ideas, which could prove to be very successful among hard-to-reach groups. Also, short-term time scales, competitive bidding to find the lowest costs and the focus on immediate outputs prevent investment in the long-term capacity of community groups to develop and support themselves.
Members heard evidence that a more simplified, streamlined and co-ordinated funding and support mechanism, with a single application process, is needed. Also, intermediaries, such as faith groups, should be approached to help reach out to under-represented groups. The provision of buildings and other assets to community organisations can help build their capacity.
Mike Tuffrey AM, Chair of the Economic Development Committee, said: 'We have received evidence from voluntary and community organisations about the minefield they face when accessing funds to help improve education, training and other local projects. These much needed community services should be given long-term support. The Committee was told that grants are given to 'safe' projects, and there is limited scope for risk taking and creativity. A common understanding is definitely needed among the various funding streams.'
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
1. The Economic and Social Development Committee is conducting an ongoing scrutiny on 'Targeting Regeneration Resources'. It held its second public meeting on Wednesday 27th November. The first meeting took place on 13th November.
At the last meeting, Members completed hearing evidence from community-based organisations. The Committee has written to 200 community, voluntary and business organisations and has received written comments from 37 organisations and umbrella groups. To date, five witnesses have provided oral evidence to the Committee's public meetings. At the next public meeting on December 11, the Committee will be looking at the technical aspects of the allocation of regeneration resources to Londoners, including the Index of Deprivation, the London Development Agency's commissioning model and the progress of area based strategies. The Committee is now considering the findings for a report to be published in the New Year.
Press release: 21 November 2002
The London Assembly Liberal Democrats have discovered that more than 200 residential properties owned by the GLA are standing empty instead of providing accommodation to help tackle the capital's housing crisis.
The Mayor admitted to Assembly member Mike Tuffrey at today's Assembly meeting that 204 properties, in various states of repair, are waiting to be sold off or returned to residential use. "While I welcome the news that the Mayor is now monitoring how many empty properties the GLA owns he must ensure that they are brought back into use to provide much-needed roofs over people's heads or sold off. Instead, they are falling into states of disrepair while GLA projects wait to be given the go-ahead," said Mr Tuffrey, Lib Dem housing spokesperson.
"For example, Transport for London has 52 empty residential units many of which relate to the plans to widen the North Circular road at Bounds Green, plans which were abandoned earlier this year. It would appear little has been done since to either dispose of the properties or bring them back into use.
"I am concerned that TfL, the Met and LFEPA will overlook the housing potential of these empty units while they concentrate on their core transport, policing and fire issues. The Mayor's job is to give the leadership necessary to tackle regional issues, such as the housing crisis. He must direct them to consider the housing potential of these units or, if they are beyond repair, to sell them off promptly."
Press release: 14 November 2002
Mike Tuffrey, Chair of the London Assembly's Economic Development Committee, yesterday called on the Government to give the Greater London Authority (GLA) more power over house building in the capital.
At the State Opening of Parliament on Wednesday, the Queen announced that referendums could now go ahead to set up regional assemblies across the UK. However, unlike the Mayor and London Assembly at the GLA, the new assemblies will have significantly more powers to deal with housing policy in their areas.
The Committee questioned the Mayor's housing advisors at a meeting yesterday, where concerns were raised about the housing targets outlined in the Mayor's draft London Plan, and whether these will meet the level of need in the capital. It was suggested to the Committee that the government would need to increase London's housing grant by two or threefold to sustain housing provision for the next five to 10 years.
Members also raised concerns about the Mayor's plans for high density buildings. The Committee wanted reassurances that this could be achieved without returning to the 1960's policies of housing families in tower blocks where they may feel isolated.
Mike Tuffrey said: 'I welcome yesterday's announcement to continue the work of devolving power in the UK. However, it is now time for the rules surrounding housing policy in London to change if we are to deal successfully with the housing demands in the capital. It is only fair that the provisions in the GLA Act contain the same powers as those proposed for the other regional assemblies.'
Press release: 13 November 2002
Mike Tuffrey has called on John Prescott to allow London to retain more of its money in order to invest in regeneration.
Commenting on the Urban Summit Mike, who is chair of the London Assembly's Economic and Social Development Committee, said: "I am calling on the Deputy Prime Minister to recognise the disproportionate contribution London makes towards the national exchequer, which limits regeneration in the capital.
"It is estimated we pay up to £20 billion to the rest of the UK and receive only a 13 per cent share of government expenditure. London must be able to retain more of this money, so that communities do not miss-out on receiving proper investment to help pay for regeneration.
"A report published by the London Assembly's Economic and Social Development Committee earlier this year, 'Rebuilding London's Future', highlighted the failure of Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) to co-ordinate policies and funding to each region through a single managing agency. It also raised concerns about the Government's decision to separate the RDA's responsibility for economic regeneration from the DTLR and Government Office for London's responsibility for social regeneration.
"I am pressing the Government to follow-up the report's findings. The London Development Agency should now be given full responsibility for the co-ordination and funding of both social and economic regeneration in the capital."
In November the committee will begin a series of public meetings at the London Assembly to ensure that funding and resources for regeneration reach those areas in London in the greatest need.
Press release: 1 November 2002
Up to £24 million set aside by the Mayor's development agency for regeneration in 2002-03 may not be spent on the capital's cash-strapped community projects, the London Assembly has heard.
At yesterday's Economic and Social Development Committee meeting, it was reported that the London Development Agency (LDA), which is responsible for implementing the Mayor's Economic Development Strategy, is forecast to underspend by £23.9m at the end of the financial year on Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) and 'Single Pot' schemes.
Representatives from the LDA acknowledged delays in getting the money to local projects but assured Committee Members that the money will not be lost. The LDA is developing a better system of monitoring how SRB money is spent to ensure that any underspend can be acted upon quickly. But the Committee is concerned that the future of some community projects may be jeopardised because they need the money now to regenerate local areas, improve transport links and provide training courses.
The meeting was the first in a series of quarterly reviews of the LDA's performance to be conducted by the Committee. At the meeting the LDA also resolved to improve how it monitors the take-up of funding and training by Black and Minority Ethnic groups. Members welcomed the LDA's performance on developing environmentally friendly industries and acquiring brownfield land for development.
Mike Tuffrey, Chair of the Committee, said: 'The Committee will be closely monitoring the LDA's finances, particularly those surrounding the SRB and 'Single Pot'. This money must be properly allocated to help projects in London regenerate their areas. The LDA recognises that a culture change and proper auditing of the SRB is needed and is taking steps to implement this. We welcome this assurance, but remain deeply concerned at the delays.'
Press release: 17 October 2002
Major transport projects like Crossrail could be scrapped because of a lack of skilled transport professionals warned London Assembly Liberal Democrat Mike Tuffrey.
The Mayor of London, appearing yesterday before the London Assembly as chair of Transport for London, agreed there were concerns about staffing and said that the timetable for Crossrail could be affected.
Mr Tuffrey, Lib Dem economic development spokesperson, said: "There are not enough project managers, construction workers, engineers and other transport professionals in London to deliver Crossrail and other planned major transport projects.
"The shortage of key trade and professional skills will jeopardise the infrastructure improvements that are vital to ensure London's continuing economic growth."
The Mayor agreed to the Lib Dem call for the London Development Agency to conduct a study of the needs of the construction industry to ensure that the wish-list set out by the Mayor in his draft London Plan has a chance of coming to fruition.
"The Mayor must also get construction industry representatives round the table to discuss tackling the industry's lack of capacity to deliver on time and on budget, and to persuade them to invest in skills development. We need a concerted effort in London from all parties," Mr Tuffrey added.
The Mayor agreed to take-up these suggestions with the LDA.
Press Release: 7th October 2002
The London Assembly has launched an investigation to help community groups in the capital obtain information about accessing money and resources for regeneration.
Earlier this year the Assembly published a report, 'Rebuilding London's Future', which revealed growing concern about where the money for regeneration goes, and whether there is systematic discrimination in its distribution. The Assembly's Economic and Social Development Committee is looking further into this issue to ensure that regeneration funds reach those in the greatest need.
The Committee has written to a wide range of businesses and community-based organisations to find out about their experiences of trying to get money that will improve schools, hospitals and local projects, and provide training for those in need. Committee Members also want to hear from other relevant organisations in London.
Mike Tuffrey, the Committee's Chair, said: 'The rules surrounding how community groups and businesses in the capital apply for regeneration funds have changed. We want to know how easy it is to get information about these funds and what problems organisations may have accessing it.
The Assembly found earlier this year that the current process is confusing and we don't want to continue to see deprived areas missing-out on vital improvements. The findings from our investigation will be published early next year.'
Organisations that wish to contribute to the Committee's investigation should email: carmen.jack@london.gov.uk or write to: Carmen Jack, Scrutiny Manager, City Hall, The Queen's Walk, London SE1 2AA.
Press release: 19 September 2002
Mike Tuffrey, GLA Lib Dem affordable housing spokesperson, has accused the Mayor of failing to answer his critics who say his affordable housing targets are unrealistic and will not meet London’s housing need.
At yesterday’s London Assembly meeting, Mr Tuffrey said the Mayor’s affordable housing policy is unachievable, given the conclusion of the recently published ‘Affordable Housing in London’ 1 report that a 50% target ‘could not be achieved in nearly two-thirds of London boroughs at present’.
The report also said that the Three Dragons’/ Nottingham Trent University (3DNTU) model ‘does not comprehensively reflect the real world behaviour of landowners and developers’ and that ‘landowners are more likely to withhold land than previously indicated by the 3DNTU study’.
“The Mayor should be doing more to bring the private sector to the table along with the boroughs, Housing Corporation and central government to confront this issue and hammer out a way forward that goes beyond anything the Mayor has so far envisaged,” said Mr Tuffrey.
Mr Tuffrey also questioned the credibility of the Mayor’s housing policy: “Surely the Mayor must be as appalled as I was to read the results of the survey conducted by the authors of this report?
“They found that out of 22 London Boroughs, 11 developers, 7 RSLs and 3 landowners, only one respondent believed that the 50% affordable housing target was ‘a realistic option’.
“It is time for the Mayor to pull his finger out and get his act together – otherwise the capital’s housing crisis will blow away all the gains in economic growth and quality of life promised in his draft London Plan.”
ENDS
Notes to editors
1. Affordable Housing in London Commercial Impact Assessment of the Three Dragons'/Nottingham Trent University Report for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, The Government Office for London and the Greater London Authority. By ATIS Real Weatheralls. Published August 2002. The report can be viewed at: http://www.planning.odpm.gov.uk/prp/lupr/descript/afford/index.htm
The London Assembly today unanimously agreed to join forces with the local and other public authorities in the capital to lobby for more money for public services.
The decision follows recommendations made in an independent report last week – commissioned by the London Assembly - calling for the proportion of London Weighting to salary in the public sector to be brought in line with that of the private sector. In a motion, Assembly Members said the report indicated the significant costs of providing public services in London and requested that the government take this into account when allocating funds to services in the capital.
Assembly Members welcomed the report and hailed it as one of critical importance for Londoners – to those who work in the public sector and to those who use public services.
Liberal Democrat Assembly Member, Mike Tuffrey, said: ‘This study provides a convincing and cogently argued case for moving from rough estimates of extra costs to hard data on pay differentials in the jobs market. Now central government must listen and ensure London gets its fair share of resources to fund the increased costs this analysis shows we need.’
ENDS
Notes to Editors
1. The investigation into London Weighting was conducted by an independent Panel, set up by the London Assembly, as a result of the investigation into Affordable Housing, Chaired by Meg Hillier. The Panel comprises members from public, private, trade union and academic bodies. The Panel was chaired by Bill Knight.
2. The report recommended that public sector employees in inner London should be paid up to 37 percent more than workers outside London, or 33 percent more if the effect of the City is excluded. Workers in outer London should be paid between 11 and 15 percent more – broadly in line with existing levels of outer London Weighting.
The Mayor’s blueprint for the capital predicts 636,000 more jobs, but fails to ensure that Londoners will actually fill them, the London Assembly has warned.
The Economic and Social Development Committee is concerned about assumptions made in the draft London Plan about economic growth, particularly in the business and financial sectors. These assumptions could mean that new jobs will not be offered to local people because they may not be skilled enough to meet the employers’ needs.
The Committee received a presentation today from John Letts, the Mayor’s Strategic Planning Manager, about the London Plan. It believes that the Mayor must include details of how less skilled Londoners will be trained, to ensure that they benefit from these job opportunites.
Mike Tuffrey, Chair of the Committee, said: ‘The London Plan presents ambitious predictions for the capital’s future. However, we are concerned that the growth predictions are not sustainable and that the new jobs may not go to the Londoners who need them. Without investment in skills training, too many will be filled by long distance commuters.’
Despite London's housing crisis, the Mayor has stopped estimating that 28,000 new affordable houses are needed each year and instead refers only to the 11,200 new affordable homes needed to be built annually for the next ten years to clear a backlog of households in housing need.
The press release claims that targets are attainable with higher levels of public subsidy, but mentions only one area of housing need identified by his Housing Commission.
'Homes for a World City', a report by the Mayor's Housing Commission published in November 2000, estimated 31,800 additional homes are needed each year for the next 10 years to meet newly arising demand in London with a further 11,200 required to deal with the backlog of homelessness, overcrowding and poor housing conditions. Of this, the Commission said that 28,000 new affordable homes needed to be provided each year for people on low or moderate incomes.
Liberal Democrat Mike Tuffrey said:
"Yet again, the Mayor has covered up true affordable housing need as estimated by his own Housing Commission to distract from the fact that his planning policies could only, at the most achieve, half that target."
"The Mayor recently claimed the credit for the increase to the housing supply of 20,730 new homes of all tenures, despite this taking place before he took office in 2000.2 Even if he designates that up to 50% of all new housing should be affordable, if only 20,000 homes are being built annually, the Mayor will not bridge the gap."
Mayor Ken Livingstone has backed down from his earlier targets to secure 28,000 extra affordable homes for London every year and now expects at the most only 11,500 per year.
At today's London Assembly meeting, the Mayor admitted that his earlier targets, based on estimates by his Housing Commission (note 1) that London needed an extra 43,000 new homes, of which 28,000 needed to be affordable homes, had now been downscaled. He now hopes to see up to 23,000 new homes being built each year in London and up to half of which would be affordable units.
Mike Tuffrey, the Liberal Democrat member who questioned the Mayor on what exactly his targets were following conflicting information issued by the Mayor's office to the press, said:
"Finally the Mayor has come clean and admitted he is failing to meet his targets. As a result, thousands of Londoners are condemned to live in totally inadequate housing for years to come.
"The Mayor now says that he aims to see 23,000 new homes being built in London per year. Even if up to 50% are designated as affordable, he can not achieve even half his original target of 28,000 extra affordable homes.
"Rather than admit this - and doing something to tackle the huge gap - he has downgraded his targets so that he can claim that he is meeting them."
ENDS
Notes for editors
1. 'Homes for a World City' - report by the Mayor's Housing Commission published November 2000. The report estimated that an additional 31,800 additional homes were needed each year for the next ten years with a further 11,200 required to deal with the backlog of homelessness, overcrowding and poor housing conditions. Of this, the Commission said that 28,000 new affordable homes needed to be provided.
The Mayor has delegated his executive powers to an unelected senior official four times during the past two years, the London Assembly discovered today.
Questioning the most prominent officer in the Mayor’s office for the first time, the Assembly uncovered the extent to which Simon Fletcher, Ken Livingstone’s Chief of Staff, stands in for London’s leader during his absence.
Mr Fletcher was invited to explain his role after the Assembly discovered that the Mayor had left his Chief of Staff, rather the Nicky Gavron, the Deputy Mayor, in charge during a three-week holiday in Australia in the spring. The Mayor’s senior adviser revealed for the first time, however, that this had been only one of a number of occasions when he had been asked to take over when Mr Livingstone is away.
Speaking on behalf of the Liberal Democrat Group, Mike Tuffrey said: ‘Simon Fletcher comes across as a shadowy figure in the twilight zone of the Mayor’s decision-making. In his manifesto, Ken Livingstone said that he would introduce the most open, accessible and inclusive style of government ever seen in the UK1.
We’ve recently learned of his secrecy over planning decisions and this is just more of the same. What happened to his manifesto commitments?’
Although pressed by Assembly Members, Mr Fletcher also declined to reveal his political affiliations. He said it was a personal matter and that as an employee of the Greater London Authority his position was politically restricted. He told the Assembly that when the Mayor was away he kept in contact by fax, e-mail and mobile phone.
Notes to Editors
1. Ken Livingstone’s Manifesto for London, April 2000
The London Assembly is to ask the Government why it is dragging its heels about making it easier for communities to get funds for improving their neighbourhoods.
The Assembly’s Economic and Social Development Committee is calling on the Government to hand over full responsibility for regeneration to the London Development Agency (LDA).
The Committee met with the Government Office for London (GoL) and the LDA yesterday, to press them on how they intend to take forward recommendations in the Committee’s report on regeneration, ‘Rebuilding London’s Future’, published earlier this year.
The current system for local projects to access funds for regeneration is confusing. The Government and numerous agencies hand out money to Londoners, who are seeking to increase employment, improve schools, obtain better housing and transport links, and to bolster communities. The Committee had recommended in March that the LDA be given full responsibility for the co-ordination and funding of both economic and social regeneration in London.
Mike Tuffrey, Chair of the Committee, said: ‘The Committee has decided to write to Nick Raynsford, Minister for Local Government and the Regions, to get some answers. We questioned GoL about giving full responsibility to the LDA for regeneration in London, and they did not give us any clear targets for implementing the report’s recommendations. This leaves us unclear about how seriously they are taking this issue. The current process is confusing and we don’t want to continue to see deprived areas missing-out on vital improvements.’
London's affordable housing crisis set to continue
Mayor Ken Livingstone has admitted that not enough affordable homes are being built to meet targets set by his Housing Commission.
The London Assembly Liberal Democrats have discovered that only 4,000 affordable homes are being built annually in London. The Mayor's own research shows that 28,000 additional affordable homes need to be built every year for the next ten years1 but his planning policies could only, at the most achieve, half that target.2
The Mayor also said, at last week's London Assembly meeting, that the number of units being built as a direct result of steps he has taken does not meet the targets.
Mike Tuffrey, the Lib Dem Assembly member who uncovered the shortfall, said:
"The Mayor recently claimed the credit for the increase to the housing supply of 20,730 new homes of all tenures, despite this taking place before he took office in 2000.
"But according to his Commission, 43,000 new homes need to be built each year - 28,000 of which need to be affordable housing. Despite designating that up to 50% of all new housing should be affordable, if only 20,000 homes are being built annually, the Mayor will not bridge this gap.
"Ken Livingstone has been unable to provide us with any answers for how he intends to resolve this. Instead he had just fiddled about on the edges through the use of his planning powers that alone are not enough to tackle the crisis. He must take a lead and use the power of his office to ensure enough affordable homes are being built.
"This problem can only be resolved if the affordable targets are backed by increased public funding and a big effort by the Mayor to get housebuilders and local authorities around the table to work out an effective strategy. The Mayor should also be lobbying Government to ensure that sufficient resources are dedicated to tackling London's affordable housing crisis."