London Assembly logoRegenerating London

 

Campaigning to regenerate London’s economy

Two months after being first elected, Mike was chosen to chair the Assembly’s then Economic & Social Development Committee. He has also repeatedly used Mayor’s Question Time to highlight many of the critical issues facing London’s economy and wider development.

Read here how Mike has held the Mayor to account on issues such as:

Mike visiting New Covent Garden Market to learn about regeneration opportunities

For an up-to-date account of Mike's questioning of the Mayor, visit the official GLA website - click here

Questions below were posted before the database was compiled.

 

Questions to the Mayor in 2004

2002

Mayor's Question Time - 15  July 2004

Question No: 985 / 2004   Private Sector Team 

Mike Tuffrey 

Will you outline the role, responsibilities and size of your private sector team?

The Private Sector Team is the interface between the business community in London and my Office.

The team consists of three permanent members - a Manager, a Senior-Coordinator and a Project Support Officer. The team reports to John Ross, Director for Economic and Business Policy.

The main responsibilities of the team are: · To maintain and co-ordinate relationships with businesses in London and with the London Business Board (London CBI, London First and London Chamber of Commerce and Industry). · Maintain an effective relationship and programme of work with ethnic minority businesses (including relations with the Asian Business Association, Chinese Businesses and the African and Caribbean Business Network) · Lead on our relations with the Higher and Further Education sector in London. · Lead on our work on women and business. · Lead on our work on the emerging markets that are important to London. · Develop a programme of work on business and the environment. · Lead on our work on Creative Industries. · Lead on work with Fairtrade. · Lead on the GLA's involvement in the CBI Annual Conference. Lead on initial queries that come to the GLA on private sector matters.

Mayor's Question Time 24 June 2004

Question No: 757 / 2004 Small Businesses 

Mike Tuffrey 

Your manifesto pledges to support small businesses in the capital. However, your track record in this area has been poor and there has been a relative decline in small businesses in London between 1997 and 2002. How do you explain this and why have you not picked up and tried to reverse this trend sooner?

I am committed to fostering the growth of a diverse, small business sector across all of London's communities.

London's economic success is dependent upon a thriving small business base that can compete and thrive in an increasingly competitive environment.

Prior to the GLA Group formation in 1997, the SBS reported that 566,000 small businesses existed*. In 2001, this figure had risen to 672,000 businesses.

Through the work of the LDA and GLA Economics, I am about to commission research which will look at factors affecting survival rates for small businesses and solutions to address the barriers which unduly affect them. The LDA/Business Link for London Annual Business Survey is another key source of information which helps us to understand the problems faced by small businesses and informs the design and delivery of LDA/Business Link business support programmes. These surveys will confirm the underlying trend in the number of SME businesses and what the key factors are.

I am also committed to addressing the difficulties faced by particular groups in starting and growing small businesses in the capital. The LDA, through its newly established Enterprise Support and Outreach team is supporting me by targeting specific groups of small businesses at start-up phase. It is in the process of developing a Regional Action Plan to strengthen the potential of BME-owned business in London following its research - Redefining BME Business. A London Action Group has been established with membership from banks, the business community, BME business representative groups and key regional agencies to develop and implement the Action Plan.

Similarly, the LDA is leading the establishment of a strategic regional partnership to spearhead the development of a London-wide strategy for women's enterprise, in response to the DTI's Strategic Framework for Women's Enterprise (May 2003).

The LDA is also leading the Access to Finance initiative, which seeks to develop and publicise existing funding vehicles (seedcorn and equity funds) for small businesses, particularly targeting companies with up to 10 employees and for more recently established enterprises.

The transition of Business Link Operator contracts from the Small Business Service to Regional Development Agencies represents a significant opportunity to bolster regional efforts to offer a demand led support service which is fit for purpose, quality assured and can meet the needs of start-ups and growing businesses alike. Business Link for London (BL4L) has already made radical changes to the way in which its services are delivered, moving from direct delivery to a brokerage model. London is in a strong position to build on these changes. While recognising the changes in national business support policy, the LDA and BL4L will work in partnership to ensure renewed focus on London's SME business sector.

Mayor's Question Time 24 June 2004

Question No: 762 / 2004 Culture Card 

Mike Tuffrey 

Your manifesto in 2000 promised a culture card for the capital. You failed to deliver this pledge and yet the same policy appears in your 2004 manifesto. When will the card be introduced? What cultural services will be included on the card? Will it be available in everywhere in London? How much will it cost to implement this policy and how will it be funded?

Research commissioned during my first term recommended that the best way to deliver a culture card for the capital was to link the proposal with smart card schemes. London Connects in conjunction with the London boroughs has been co-ordinating smart card schemes in the city. The Oyster Card, now it is established, presents an ideal opportunity to explore options for extending its use and maximising its potential for Londoners. London Connects is being commissioned to carry out research into culture applications which could be added to the Oyster Card.

Mayor's Question Time 24 June 2004

Question No: 763 / 2004 New Year's Eve 

Mike Tuffrey

How will free public transport on New Year's Eve be funded this year? What celebrations are planned for London for New Year's Eve and how will the event be funded?

Each mode within TfL has provided in its 2004/05 budget for the provision of free public transport on New Year's Eve.

It is planned to hold a similar event at midnight to that held last year. It will be primarily funded by Visit London, from that part of its budget allocated to New Year's Eve. There will be some additional support from the GLA and sponsorship will also be sought.

Mayor's Question Time 28 April 2004 

638 / 2004 - Thames Gateway Community Facilities 

Mike Tuffrey 

Whilst the prospect of 90,000 new properties in the London part of the Thames Gateway has been publicised by the LDA, there is little mention of the scale of public services need. How many of the following community facilities do you estimate will be required to provide services to the planned 90,000 homes? A) Hospitals, B) Nurseries, C) Primary schools, D) Secondary schools, E) Police stations, F) Fire stations, G) Libraries, H) Leisure centres?

We cannot begin to realise the aspiration of building sustainable communities in London Thames Gateway without an understanding of the social infrastructure needs of these communities, and an assessment of how these needs can be met. The London Thames Gateway Development & Investment Framework (LTGDIF), and the investment targets discussed in it, take full account of this issue and are based on detailed research by the London Development Agency.

The LTGDIF 27 April 2004 was launched this week by a partnership of the GLA and LDA, in association with TGLP, Housing Corporation, English Partnerships and the NHS in London. The assessment in the LTGDIF suggests that the following infrastructure will be required to support 90,000 new homes in London Thames Gateway:

The LTGDIF also indicates the likely phasing of housing development in London Thames Gateway, enabling the planning of phased delivery of the social infrastructure.

The outcome of the 2004 Spending Review, and ongoing discussions with our public sector partners, will inform the development of the LDA's investment model for London Thames Gateway and our approach to social infrastructure provision.

Mayor's Question Time 28 April 2004 

639 / 2004 - Thames Gateway funding 

Mike Tuffrey 

How much more funding, than already available, will be required to ensure that the 90,000 houses and all of the essential, accompanying community infrastructure can be built in the London Thames Gateway?

Detailed research by the London Development Agency, on behalf of the Thames Gateway Steering Group, has calculated that the total cost of building 90,000 homes, along with the necessary social and physical and environmental improvement works, would be around £16bn. We currently expect the private sector to meet about half this cost, with the remainder coming from the public sector. These calculations and assumptions form the basis of the London Thames Gateway Development & Investment Framework (LTGDIF), published this week.

Currently available funding covers the period up to and including financial year 2005/6. The extra investment needed to build 90,000 homes, and provide the supporting infrastructure and environmental improvements, will be required over a sustained period to 2016 and beyond. The LTGDIF indicates the likely phasing of development in London Thames Gateway, enabling an indicative analysis of funding needs over this period.

Government is currently conducting its Spending Review 2004 process, defining Government spending through to 2007/8; the announcement is expected this summer. The Spending Review will set out Government funding for London Thames Gateway over this period. We have shared our investment / funding analysis for the London Thames Gateway with the Office for the Deputy Prime Minister, which has used it in its own submission to the Treasury as part of the Spending Review 2004 process.

Besides our input into the Spending Review process, we have been working closely with the boroughs, the NHS, the Environment Agency and other public sector partners whose services and support will be essential to the development of sustainable communities in the Gateway. We are also developing working relationships with the private sector investors and developers whose investment will be essential if we are to reach our targets.

Mayor's Question Time 21 March 2004

455 / 2004 - LDA

Mike Tuffrey

Who is ultimately responsible for setting the LDA's agenda?

The Economic Strategy set out the agenda for the LDA which is also informed by transport, development, cultural and environmental polices for London. Under the GLA Act I have responsibility for the economic strategy as well as for transport, development, cultural and environmental strategies for London, therefore I am ultimately responsible for setting the policy agenda for the LDA within framework of government targets for RDAs.

Mayor's Question Time 21 March 2004

456 / 2004 - LDA Performance

Mike Tuffrey

Why does the business community apparently lack faith in the LDA's direction and openness to consultation, as evidenced by comments made by their representatives at January's Budget Committee meeting? What plans do you have to remedy this?

It is not true that the business community lacks faith in the LDA. The DTI/MORI National RDA Stakeholder Pilot Survey in 2003 showed stakeholders perceived business satisfaction with the LDA to be ahead of that for other RDAs (59% of London stakeholders were satisfied with the LDA's overall performance compared with the national RDA average of 56%).

The LDA is always working to improve its relevance and standing with business and others, and has achieved real success in issues of direct concern to the private sector, such as supporting London's key visitor and tourism industries, with the £5.8 million spent on the two Totally London events in 2003 generating £21.4-28.8 in new business; supporting development in places like Wembley and key sites in the Thames Gateway that will provide major new facilities, homes and workspaces; taking a leading role in developing and implementing the masterplan process for the Lower Lea in support of London's 2012 Olympic bid; supporting training in key sectors and for groups with particular needs (such as the Disability Employment Action project); and under the Neighbourhood Nurseries Initiative investing over £ 3 million to support 36 projects (with 15 nurseries benefiting from the first phase, creating 521 new childcare places in London. 

Business is being extensively consulted and involved in preparation of the revised Economic Development Strategy. The private sector will be a vital partner to delivery of the policies and objectives in the Strategy, and the LDA will continue to work hard to ensure it works closely with business to ensure its activities are relevant and responsive to its needs.

Mayor’s Question Time - 27 March 2002

137/2002         Growth in London Population

Is the predicted growth in London’s population sustainable?
(supplementary questions)

Mike Tuffrey:  We see this population growth and these projections, from the Liberal Democrat perspective, as an opportunity.  We must seize the opportunity of the growth and the economic development and the drivers behind it and the wealth created, to redress some of London’s historic imbalances and injustices.  One issue is, for example, the poor state of schooling in many inner city areas.  Can I ask him then, first on the schooling question whether he sticks with what he said exactly a month ago in this room, that if these population projections are right - a younger population and more children - we are talking about 150 new schools in London over the next decade.  If that’s so, can he tell us what he’s actually done, given the urgency of the situation, to take a leadership role with others who have direct responsibilities, for example, the boroughs?  What has he actually done on that other than being less than helpful to efforts of parents in places like Southwark who want to open a new school?  Is he aware, for example, that borough councils, such as my own home Borough of Lambeth, are still busy closing primary schools, and what is he going to do about that?

The Mayor:  As you know the Act makes clear that I as Mayor and the GLA have no powers in relation to education, it is only through the planning side that we get involved.  Can I say that I think the problems of inner London schools are very much a consequence of the abolition of the ILEA.

The position is that I’ve met with Estelle Morris and explained the scale of the new school construction needed.  We now think the figure is 130 schools,150 was the very first calculation made, which is equivalent to two and a half times the size of Regents Park.  So it is a huge issue.  The Government wasn’t alert to that, any more than we were a couple of months ago.  They have now taken it on board.  It will involve the Government having to recalculate the way they give grants for school construction.  At the present time it almost determines that the school can only be constructed under the financial yardstick if open space is taken.  It doesn’t allow for the building on existing buildings.

Mike Tuffrey:  If we’ve got this level of growth in schools, never mind houses and everything else, where are they going to go?  Brownfield sites obviously, because nobody wants to build on green space, so I had a look in the LDA strategy- one of my little cures for insomnia since I arrived here is reading all these great strategies.  I finally tracked a reference down in the LDA Corporate Plan where the figure is 30 hectares of brownfield land reclaimed per year.  Now I don’t think you need a degree in maths or geography to know that, if the population growth equivalent is the size of Leeds, 30 hectares is not going to get us very far.  When did he last go and talk to his LDA board about these issues and what instructions has he given them to raise the expectations of what they’ve got to achieve?

Mayor’s Question Time 27 March 2002

130 / 2002 - Draft Cultural Strategy

Mike Tuffrey

What has happened to your draft cultural strategy?

Following the submission of the Cultural Strategy Group’s advice to me before Christmas my staff have agreed how to proceed on the development of my draft Cultural Strategy. I want to ensure that the strategy has a robust evidence base and a clear policy framework.  The CSG conducted a range of research and consultation which has contributed to the strategy work but there are some areas that I want to see strengthened and to this end further work is being carried out over the next few months.  I anticipate signing off a draft before the summer and it coming to Assembly in September for scrutiny.  I would hope that the draft would be published for public consultation in later this year.

131 / 2002   -  Nominations to Cultural Institutions

Mike Tuffrey

What nominations have you made to cultural institutions in your capacity as Mayor?

I have nominated Yvonne Marson to the London Sports board, Maya Even to the board of the London Museums Agency, and Richard Sumray to the London Marathon Trust. These appointments are all from the Cultural Strategy Group. Maya Even is also a member of the board of the South Bank Centre but I did not make this appointment. In addition, I have nominated Trevor Phillips to the board of the Royal Parks, and Nicky Gavron to the London Advisory Board of English Heritage.

133 / 2002   -   Assistance to Cultural Institutions

Mike Tuffrey

What financial or other assistance have you provided to museums, galleries, libraries, archives or other cultural institutions in Greater London?

I have given support to a number of cultural institutions. In the heritage sector, officer advice and support has been given to the London Museums Agency, facilitating a meeting on the establishment of a London museum hub. Museums represented at the meeting included the Museum of London, the Grange Museum, Croydon Clocktower, the Horniman Museum, and the Geffrye Museum. Officers are working closely with Cultural Partners for London which includes London Arts, Heritage Lottery Fund, the London Libraries Development Agency and the Area Archives Council.

I have explained in separate answers how I am supporting events and festivals that celebrate the cultural diversity of London, attract tourism and encourage economic development.

Mayor’s Question Time 22 May 2002

Q243/02 - VALUE FOR MONEY - Tourism

Are you delivering value for money for Londoners?
(supplementary questions)

Mike Tuffrey:  Eric and the Conservatives seem to confuse value for money for actually spending less, whereas from our side it’s about spending wisely.  Londoners did give the Mayor substantially more money this year, but on culture and tourism he is spending the same - it’s level spending in that area.  I want to focus his attention to Teresa Wickham, chair of London Tourist Board, who resigned only a month ago and here’s what she said when she resigned,

“London needs and deserves a properly funded and well managed organisation that is truly a representative of and reflects all aspects of tourism.  There is a lack of urgency in getting a strategy moving for the future.  An urgent action plan is needed.  Ken is helping, but not doing enough.  Until now all we have had are words.  It’s time for action”

Could the Mayor comment and respond to what she’s had to say?

Ken Livingstone:  I’d be quite happy to quote the remainder of her letter where she congratulates me on the good working relationship we had and what we’ve been able to achieve.  I think, once again, this reflects the flawed structure.  I did not have immediate responsibility for tourism.  It came in only after my first year.  I had to negotiate the devolution of the money that the DCMS puts into tourism for London to the GLA and then on to the LDA who then devolve it down to the London Tourist Board.  I think that’s far too many layers of bureaucracy between the actual people taking decisions and the suppliers of the money.

We, I think, have had a very good response to the impact of 11 September.  As the foot and mouth crisis impacted on London, we did what we could to try and attract more visitors from abroad.  Once 11 September happened, it indicated something like a 30% to 50% reduction in the turnover of tourism-linked industries in the centre of London.  The package we put in place clearly played some part in getting those figures back to relatively normal.  Attendance at theatres was back to normal by the second week in December and I think the impact of our cheap tickets arrangement had a big impact there.  We now are looking at a much better and co-ordinated tourism strategy for London and the key weakness was this: we were never allowed to advertise in Britain.  That has now gone.

The idea we’ll always be able to attract people from abroad is clearly not the case; it’s massively impacted by the over-valued pound at the present time.  A lot of the tourism that has come to London to take up the gap left by the Americans and the Japanese has been from the rest of Britain and we’ve played a key part in that.  But we will continue to develop it.  There will be an election for a new chair of the London Tourist Board in the new few days.  It’s a lively contest and I’ll be looking forward to working with whoever wins it.

Mike Tuffrey:  The measure of success of the Mayor, or anybody indeed in elected office, is making the existing system, whatever its flaws - and we would share many of the criticisms of the existing system - making it work for Londoners.  And you were roundly criticised, not just by Teresa Wickham but by others, for doing too little on tourism in particular.  So, focusing on the Great London Deals initiative, which has just been launched, which is welcome, can you tell us what the response rate is?  How are you actually going to measure success of that?  It’s focused on major hotel groups.  What are the specific plans to support smaller businesses and to widen this approach?

Ken Livingstone:  I mean, to put it into context, the money that I put in and the matching funding gave us £4 million to play with and the tourism budget in London is the second or third largest industry.  We are talking tens of billions.  So, we are only a minor player at the margins.  We will see some impact of that, we’ll build on the successes.  But, at the end of the day, it’s working with the private sector and a lot of the money in that £4 million went into providing assistance to the small tourism firms during the crisis last year.  We’ll be starting to get now the analysis the LDA does about the effectiveness of that and we will use that to build on for future years.

The biggest single success will be that the only major new tourist attraction coming to London, of a world-class status, is the one I launched on Monday, which is happening simply and solely because of my involvement - a world class aquarium which will be in Newham, the poorest borough in Britain - and bring a million tourists into Newham.

Mayor’s Question Time 19 June 2002

Q319/02 - Business Support

How are you ensuring that efforts to support business are being targeted at the sectors with most potential for growth, and that job opportunities are being targeted at the Londoners who need them most?
(supplementary questions)

Mike Tuffrey:  Mr Mayor, can I take you back to your first answer, where you talked about the need to decide where to put our regeneration focus?  The question of whether regeneration schemes and public sector intervention in the economy should back winners or focus on increasing the chances, if you like, of existing losers has bedevilled the question of regeneration funding since day one.  You will be familiar with the Assembly's Rebuilding London's Future Report which you helped to launch.  Can I remind you of recommendation four, where we said that an assessment was urgently needed at a regional level of the effectiveness of regeneration funding schemes?  We had your people from the LDA in to see us last week and we also had officials from the Government Office for London.  Are you aware of the fact that both of them played an elegant game of pass the parcel as to who should actually take responsibility for taking forward that recommendation?  Will you instruct the LDA to cooperate with the Government Office for London and to take a lead in getting our recommendation four in particular moving forward fast?

Ken Livingstone:  I will ask the LDA what their advice is on this.  Having established a London Development Agency, which everyone accepts has the most high profile and distinguished board membership of any of the regional development agencies, I do think there’s a good case now for the Government Office for London, English Partnership, pulling back and devolving their role and their money so there's one body taking all this through.  And I thought that was the broad thrust of Eric's report, which I completely agree with.  So, I will ask the LDA to advise me on this and I will take their advice on the issue.

Mike Tuffrey:  Just to get an absolute answer on the evaluation.  It's not the funding.  We agree with you on the funding and indeed you agree with us on the funding.  It's about taking a lead on getting together at a regional level and an objective, independent, transparent assessment of all the regeneration funding schemes, however funded.  That's what we need.

Ken Livingstone:  I will take that decision once I have been advised by George Barlow and Mike Ward what their preference is.  Because I think I will find myself back in my own development agency, rather than the Government Office for London.

Mayor’s Question Time 19 June 2002

347 / 2002    -  Wembley Stadium

Mike Tuffrey

What role will you take in ensuring that the Wembley Stadium project keeps to timetable and budget?

I am keeping a close eye on progress with the Wembley development, however at this moment, it is out of our hands.  I have reaffirmed all the infrastructure support necessary and the LDA has committed funding to the main project.  Legal negotiations are currently underway.  A decision from the project’s bankers is expected imminently.  The question of the banking support to WNSL to build a stadium is a matter for the company and the bankers.  They are in charge of that timetable, but I am of course trying to encourage them to move as quickly as possible.

Mayor’s Question Time 19 June 2002

351 / 2002             -  Economic Development Priorities

Mike Tuffrey

What involvement did London Boroughs have in drawing up the new Economic Development Priorities and Performance Targets for London?

The strategic priorities for London’s economic development are set out in my Economic Development Strategy published in July 2001. This development of this strategy was informed by extensive consultation which included various submissions from London’s boroughs, the ALG, consultation events held in North, South, Central, West and East London. The core principles of this strategy are contained in a ‘Charter for London’ which was formally endorsed by sixteen key regional partners, including the Association of London Government.

I recently approved the London Development Agency’s 2002-5 Corporate Plan which sets out how we will deliver this agenda in partnership with the private sector, public sector and voluntary sector. The preparation of this plan and the performance targets that it contains were also subject to consultation in Autumn 2001. We received 27 written submissions from London boroughs and the ALG participated in a workshop with other Charter Partners to inform the development of the performance targets.

Mayor’s Question Time 24 July

London Weighting

Mike Tuffrey:  I want to ask you about London Weighting, so your notes to Question 435 may prove helpful.  On London Weighting, would you agree that one of the barriers to tackling poverty are nationally negotiated pay rates which do not have an adequate London premium?  If so, will you endorse, if you have not already, the London Weighting Advisory Panel?  In particular, can you tell me whether a copy has been sent to the Treasury, whether you have engaged in any discussions with them, and what their response has been?

The Mayor:  Wide-ranging though my powers are, I am not in the habit of distributing the Assembly reports.  I assume the Assembly can decide how they wish to act there, to distribute their reports and lobby behind them.  I do think - and I am not making a cheap point - that this is the weakness.  The Assembly produces often very good reports, but then they just stay there, and you do not then go out and lobby.  And I think on the London Weighting report, the Assembly on a cross-party basis should now be going out talking to government and employers and taking that point.  It broadly has my support.

All I will say is this: I very much want to see the sort of figure the Assembly is talking about applied as a realistic London Weighting to the lower paid.  I do not want it for Anthony or myself.  You want a proper phasing out of that, as the top salaries start to kick in, because we do not need London Weighting.  People down at the bottom of the pile do.

The Chair:  As a point of information, your point on the follow-up is entirely taken, but I should say that the lead Member on this, Meg Hillier, is indeed laying out a series of follow-up activities, and indeed, it is also being referred to Mike Tuffrey.

435 / 2002                 -  London Weighting

Mike Tuffrey

Does the mayor support the findings of the Assembly’s London Weighting Advisory Panel, and what action has he taken since the report’s publication to make the case nationally for adequate resourcing of London’s special needs in this regard?

The Mayor: I support in principle the main recommendations. The approach would simplify the task of setting London weighting levels for public sector workers, and would generally be more equitable than the current mix of methods.  It is also likely to raise salaries for many groups of public sector workers, including nurses and teachers (although this is not actually demonstrated in the report).   

However, the report is thin on how the recommendations would work out in practice and what the consequences of the new approach would be for different groups of workers.  I therefore do have some reservations. 

In particular, the report does not take adequate account of the fact that the London premium paid by employers in the private sector is lower for lower paid jobs.  London has a large supply of marginalised low skilled labour for which there is relatively low demand, meaning that employers do not have to provide the same level of London premium as they do for relatively scarce skilled labour.  Under these circumstances, the private sector London premium is not a good measure of the extra costs faced by London workers.

The timing of the report is too late to influence the Comprehensive Spending Review which has been announced recently.  So I would be very interested to hear how the Assembly plan to take their proposals forward.  The ALG with GLA and functional body support have been working hard to ensure that the higher costs of providing services in London are reflected in the Government’s formula grant review options which are currently out for consultation.  The Assembly’s report will be used to reinforce London’s case.

Mayor’s Question Time 18 September 2002

Question 641/02  -  Delay in publication of strategies

Will the Mayor comment on why the publication of a number of Mayoral Strategies, including the Children’s and Young Person’s Strategy, have been subject to further delay?
(supplementary questions)

Mike Tuffrey: My question relates to the delay on the Tourism Strategy.  Are you aware that - while that has been delayed, spending has dropped by over £1.24 billion - that figure compares with your little foray into foreign affairs yesterday on the Gulf War, which brought back memories for those of us who remember the foreign affairs policies of the GLC.  Are you aware overseas tourists and air passenger transport, is down 2.4% while you’ve been the Mayor?  Do you regret the damage that’s being done to London’s economy through the delays in bringing forward the Tourism Strategy?  And can I ask, looking forward in an attempt to be positive, who has ownership of the Tourism Strategy?  How are we going to see this actually taken forward?

The Mayor:  I think the turn down in our tourist trade is not due to the delay in my provisional Tourism Strategy but due primarily to September 11 and a general sluggishness in the global economy overall.  We responded very well and very dramatically, in the first part of last year, as foot and mouth took its toll, I did several initiatives with the London Tourist Board - primarily targeted at the North American market.  After September 11 we produced an emergency package, which meant that although, in central London, some businesses dependent on tourism saw their turnover plummet by 50% in the aftermath of September 11, by December last year the sales of the air tickets were back up to their normal level and trade was recovering quite well.

The Tourism Strategy that will come out on Friday – I’m not going to anticipate what’s in it –  will have a whole package to strengthen our position.  The document I published yesterday, is the regular monthly economic analysis of London’s position, which shows that whilst a year ago we had a whole year of growth of about 4% in London’s GNP, we are now most probably down about 1%, and that is really a problem for London.  It also had a supplementary paper where I commissioned a leading economist from inside the oil industry - very well respected and independent - to look at the implications of a possible further Gulf War based on the experience of the last Gulf War.

What that report identified is 2.6% of London’s economy is spending by American tourists, therefore, we’re particularly vulnerable if a confrontation leads to a further loss of American tourism.

We’ve also sat down with the London Tourist Board, completely re-jigged their way of working.  We’ve done it in consensus with the whole industry, seeing the election of a new chair of the Tourist Board - a member of the LDA - and moved towards the appointment of a new chief officer.  So, tremendous progress has been made and the London Tourist Board will be strengthened by that.

Mike Tuffrey:  I’m concerned to know how we’re going to take this forward, and particularly how it knits in with the Cultural Strategy, which is long awaited and, indeed, the whole of the London plan.

The Mayor:  The strategy will be published on Friday.  It would have been a lot easier if it had been published last Friday and you could’ve asked detailed questions about that.  But if you’d like to come to the press launch on Friday you’d be quite welcome to ask questions if you’re eager to do so.

Mayor's Question Time 18 September 2002

624 / 2002       -           Non-delivery: support for social enterprises

Mike Tuffrey

Given the important role that social enterprises play in promoting the growth of London's economy, improving city living, sustaining regeneration and tackling social exclusion, what are you doing to address the criticisms made in the London Social Economy Taskforce's consultation draft document about the need to create a business support strategy for the sector (Time to Deliver, July 2002), notably that: -

Currently there is "fragmented availability of accessible and appropriate support"; - a "window of opportunity could easily be missed if the new resources are not invested" now; - "if the potential of social enterprise is to be reached, more funding will be required....(and) existing funding needs to be spent more effectively"; and- the needs of black and minority ethnic enterprises are being especially neglected because they "face exactly the same business challenges as other social enterprises, but also face additional barriers due to racial discrimination and ethnic stereotyping".

The Mayor: The LDA is part of the London Social Economy Taskforce and has played an integral part in commissioning the Social Enterprise Business Support Strategy, Time to Deliver, currently out for consultation.  A key aim of this strategy is to improve the quality of, and access to, social enterprise business support services in London.  

The LDA is developing a work programme of activities to support the development of social enterprise.   This includes:

1.      Working with the Social Economy Taskforce to develop the business support strategy for social enterprise.

2.      Community Development Finance - working through the LDA Private Investment Commission to ensure the right framework exists for effective implementation of the Community Investment Tax Credit.  The tax credit will help to increase private sector investment to grass-roots enterprises in disadvantaged areas.

3.      Undertaking a feasibility study to develop work on asset-based community regeneration to enable and empower community regeneration organisations.

The LDA is already funding a number of projects to support the development of social enterprises through the Single Regeneration Budget and Clusters Fund.  These include:

a)  Support to Social Enterprise London to provide practical support and finance to social enterprises

b) London Credit Union Support Programme providing a comprehensive programme of support for Credit Unions.

c)REBOOT – support to a social enterprise in Hackney providing IT support, business advice, training and conversion of premises to other social enterprises.

d) Internet Cluster development – the development of a website portal for a cluster of social enterprises.