MQT answers March 17

384 bus

Question No: 2017/1794

Andrew Dismore

The 384 bus route is a popular route in the north of Barnet, serving residents of Cockfosters, East Barnet, New Barnet and High Barnet, many of whom live a long way from other bus routes. It forms an important transport link to Barnet Hospital, JCOSS and High Barnet station. Yet TfL plan on reducing the frequency of the service in weekdays from 15 minutes to 20 minutes, and remove the extra bus serving the JCOSS School run. Will you reverse this decision and ensure all Londoners have access to regular bus services?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

Affordability of care homes [1]

Question No: 2017/1795

Andrew Dismore

What are you doing to ensure the affordability of care homes? Are you ensuring new care home planning applications should require an affordable contribution, and if not will you consider it?

Written response from the Mayor

The term ‘care homes’ usually refers to residential care homes, which come under the definition of residential/ nursing care (including end of life/ hospice care and dementia care) in the London Plan. Such developments provide non-self-contained residential accommodation for people who have higher care needs- nursing homes include 24 hour medical care from a qualified nurse. These types of development are generally classified as residential institutions (C2 use class) and are not subject to affordable housing requirements.

 

There are a number of self-contained ‘specialist older peoples housing’ options such as sheltered accommodation: self-contained residential accommodation normally with additional communal facilities, and a warden or alarm system; or extra care accommodation which provides self-contained residential accommodation designed and managed to meet the needs of people who are or are likely to have additional requirements- with the option of buying in additional care or services. These are generally categorised as C3 accommodation in the planning use class system and are subject to affordable housing requirements. Viability assessments are required to ascertain the maximum reasonable level of affordable specialist older persons housing the scheme can provide.

 

The current London Plan provides indicative annualised strategic benchmarks to inform local targets and performance indicators for specialist housing for older people for the plan period. These Borough benchmark targets are broken down by private sale, intermediate sale and affordable rent.

 

Work is underway looking into the subject of specialist older peoples housing for the London Plan review, and the indicative annualised strategic benchmarks targets for Boroughs will be updated.

 

Affordability of care homes [2]

Question No: 2017/1796

Andrew Dismore

How many care homes have you approved under your mayoralty, how many units has this delivered, and of those units how many were affordable?

Written response from the Mayor

The London Plan and associated Supplementary Planning Guidance recognise that there are different types of specialist older peoples accommodation: some are categorised in the planning system as ‘conventional’ housing (C3 use class); while some are non self-contained and more institutional in character and as such categorised as Residential Institutions (‘C2’ use class) and some specialised developments include elements of both types.

 

The metrics for measuring the different types of provision also vary – C3 conventional housing provision tends to be measured in units. The subject of your question ‘care homes’ are considered as C2 and are usually measured in bedspaces rather than units. As set out in the answer to MQ 1765, C2 care homes are not subject to affordable housing requirements.

 

While the overall number of care homes approved and completed (on site) is monitored through the London Development Database this data is not yet available for the 10 months of this mayoralty.

 

Mill Hill East

Question No: 2017/1797

Andrew Dismore

Will you restore the through trains at Mill Hill East throughout the  day as it is now a much busier station since this service was cut back?

Written response from the Mayor

Mill Hill East remains the quietest station on the Northern line. The shuttle service ensures that services are timetabled to meet the demands of the greatest number of customers. I am afraid that reintroducing through trains would have a negative impact on journey time and reliability for customers travelling to High Barnet, Totteridge & Whetstone, Woodside Park or West Finchley.

 

The shuttle service runs approximately every 12 minutes during the peak, which is sufficient for the demand at the station. TfL is unable to increase the frequency of the shuttle service due to the single track layout. This means that only one train at a time can enter, allow passengers to alight, board and exit. The Northern line timetable schedules the departure of the Mill Hill East shuttle shortly after a train arrives into Finchley Central station to ensure that customers can easily and quickly continue their journey.

 

 

 

Stirling Corner

Question No: 2017/1798

Andrew Dismore

Will you give an update on the improvement to pedestrian crossing and cycling facilities at Stirling Corner?

Written response from the Mayor

TfL is making good progress designing improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists at Stirling Corner – including looking at the feasibility of installing a new signalised toucan (cyclist and pedestrian) crossing on the southern side of the roundabout. Public consultation on the proposals is expected by this autumn.

 

 

 

Euston and Kings Cross overcrowding 1

Question No: 2017/1799

Andrew Dismore

On how many occasions were a) Euston and b) Kings Cross underground stations closed fully or partially due to overcrowding in the last 3 months?

Written response from the Mayor

Crowding is more often a consequence rather than a cause of delays. London’s success means the city’s population is growing, which is why TfL is delivering one of the biggest modernisation programmes in the world, to meet London’s growing demand.

 

TfL staff carefully manage the flows of customers at stations to ensure a safe travel environment and minimum inconvenience for customers. Sometimes this requires stations to be closed, for a short time, in order to relieve congestion.

 

Below is the data you requested. The data is taken from the number of gateline closures. Gateline closures can, however, be caused by other factors such as gates losing power, staff unavailability, critical asset failures or security issues. It is therefore likely that not all these closures were caused by congestion.

 

King’s Cross St Pancras

Main ticket hall – 14 occasions for an average of 13 minutes

North ticket hall – 11 occasions for an average of 12 minutes

Metropolitan ticket hall – 10 occasions for an average of 15 minutes

 

Euston

Ticket hall – 12 occasions for an average of four minutes

 

Please see the attached table for further information.

 

TfL continues to keep the situation at all busy stations under review, including looking at what further measures may be required in the future to manage rising demand for Tube services.

 

 

 

Euston and Kings Cross overcrowding 2

Question No: 2017/1800

Andrew Dismore

On how many occasions were a) Euston and b) Kings Cross underground stations’ entrance barriers reduced to limit overcrowding in the last 3 months?

Written response from the Mayor

To help prevent crowding, station staff use a range of measures to control the number of customers entering platforms which may include the closure or partial closure of ticket gatelines.

 

TfL does not record or hold data of instances where gatelines were reduced or partially closed. Information on full station entrance closures at Euston and King’s Cross St. Pancras can be found in answer MQ 2017/1799 and its appendix.

 

 

 

rough sleepers

Question No: 2017/1801

Andrew Dismore

Your £4.2m boost for vulnerable rough sleepers is very welcome; but do you think the benefits of this could be undermined by Westminster City Council’s decision  to cut  the Council budget for rough sleeping and supported housing  by over £800,000 just weeks after the Council’s own figures showed the number of those out on the streets had more than doubled , and having already lost 30 bed spaces in 2015 with the closure of the Bayswater hostel?

Written response from the Mayor

My officers have worked closely with Westminster City Council, which is represented on my ‘No Nights Sleeping Rough’ taskforce, to ensure that their current and planned future services for this client group complement the new services being funded from the £4.2m.

 

 

 

Night time industry impact on residents

Question No: 2017/1802

Andrew Dismore

On 23 February, your Night Czar, Amy Lamé, gave a speech to night time industry leaders, councillors, police and the culture sector at an event organised by the Night Time Industries Association and the Creative Industries Federation. In so boosting London’s night time culture, do you agree that there is a balance to be struck between the interests of night time economy businesses and customers and those of residents who may be inconvenienced or worse as the result of anti social behaviour and other crimes that are linked to the night time economy; and if so, where is that balance to be struck?

Written response from the Mayor

London’s diverse night time economy and culture, from theatres and pubs, to restaurants, music venues and nightclubs, is second to none and forms an essential part of the city’s cultural offer. It brings £26.3bn to London’s economy every year and employs one in eight people in the capital.

 

I want to make London the world’s leading light for nightlife, but to do this we’ve got to keep everyone happy, so I agree that balancing the needs of those who work at night, those who want to enjoy the nightlife and those who want a good night’s sleep is key.

 

There is currently no oversight of this critical part of London’s economy. This is why I have appointed the UK’s first Night Czar and the Chair of my Night Time Commission, who are working hand-in-glove with businesses, local authorities, the MPS, TfL and residents to share best practice and ensure that a balance is struck between the needs of businesses and residents.

 

 

Devolution of healthcare powers

Question No: 2017/1803

Andrew Dismore

In the budget the Chancellor confirmed that an agreement has been reached with you, to devolve a number of healthcare powers in London;  which powers are to be so devolved, and when?

Written response from the Mayor

Over 100 different local, London and national organisations have been working to explore how devolution of certain powers could speed up improvements to the health and care of Londoners. Our areas of focus have been:

 

  • Improving integration – to enable health and care providers to work much more closely together
  • NHS estates – exploring how to make it easier and faster for health and care providers to make the best use out of land and assets
  • Working together – how joint working at a local level can enable Londoners to lead healthier lives and prevent ill-health.

It is important to get the details right and London and national partners are working together to achieve this. We expect to sign a Memorandum of Understanding in the coming weeks.

 

 

 

Impact of business rates increases

Question No: 2017/1804

Andrew Dismore

In your monthly report, you have said that while you welcome moves by the Chancellor to reduce the impact of business rates increases and overhaul the business rates system, you do not believe that the Chancellor’s proposals go far enough and that many London companies could be forced out of business as a result of the new charges. How many businesses do you consider are at threat and what do you consider the impact will be on London’s economy and jobs?

Written response from the Mayor

It is impossible to give a figure on the number of businesses under threat and the impact there will be on London’s economy and jobs at this stage. Due to the nature of the transitional relief scheme the increases for many SMEs will be phased in and therefore the full impact may not be felt for up to 3 years.

 

The ratepayers of up to 7,500 larger properties are facing increases in their bills of 44% on 1 April – in parts of central and inner London this category will include many medium sized firms and small shops.   They are likely to be impacted much more quickly.

 

The GLA will monitor the effects of the revaluation on jobs, businesses and investment.

 

 

 

Chelsea Football Club

Question No: 2017/1805

Andrew Dismore

On 6 March, you approved Chelsea Football Club’s plans for a new £500 million stadium. How much has been the cost of policing Chelsea home games this season so far; how much has been or will be recovered from the club towards that cost; what was the full cost of policing their home games last year and how much was recovered; and do you agree that if they can afford to spend £500 million on a new stadium, they can afford to reimburse the full costs of policing their games?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Chief Digital Officer

Question No: 2017/1806

Andrew Dismore

When do you expect to make an appointment; and what will his/her priorities be?

Written response from the Mayor

The process of recruiting London’s first ever Chief Digital Officer will begin very shortly.

 

The post holder will play a key leadership role across London on digital transformation, helping Londoners to lead more digitally enabled lives and access the services and information that they need.

 

 

 

Small London companies and business rates

Question No: 2017/1807

Andrew Dismore

The Federation of Small Businesses has said that three quarter of small firms in London are saying their biggest problem is business rates and that London is in serious danger of losing its vital micro and small businesses. What are you doing to lobby Government on their behalf, especially over the forthcoming increase in business rates in the capital?

Written response from the Mayor

I met with the Chancellor in the lead up to the Budget and we have undertaken extensive lobbying with London Councils and London’s business community on the impact of the 2017 business rates revaluation on the capital.

 

While I welcome the limited proposals the Chancellor announced in the Budget  – in particular the special transitional scheme for small businesses losing eligibility for small business rates relief – they are a mere drop in the ocean compared to the nearly £1 billion increase in business rates faced by ratepayers as a result of the revaluation.

 

 

 

Your tour of European capitals

Question No: 2017/1808

Andrew Dismore

Who did you meet on your tour; and how do you gauge its success and value for money?

Written response from the Mayor

Given the tragic events in Westminster last week, I have made the decision to proceed with visits to Brussels and Paris only. This means my visit to Berlin, Madrid and Warsaw will not take place this week, though I hope these can be rearranged for a later date.

 

Brussels and Paris are two cities with a very close relationship with London and, with Article 50 due to be triggered this week, I will attend a series of important meetings at which Brexit and security issues will be discussed.

 

I will of course publish a list of who I met and the value of the visit in my next Mayor’s Report to the London Assembly.

 

 

 

 

Brexit

Question No: 2017/1809

Andrew Dismore

When will you publish your London Brexit blueprint paper detailing the capital’s key requirements from the Brexit negotiations?

Written response from the Mayor

My response to the Government’s Brexit White Paper was published on 13 March, and can be found at the following link:

 

https://www.london.gov.uk/about-us/mayor-london/londons-global-and-european-future-response-brexit-paper?source=vanityurl.

 

 

 

London schools cuts

Question No: 2017/1810

Andrew Dismore

Hundreds of schools in London may lose up to £500 for every pupil due to the government’s new annual funding formula. What representations are you making to the Government over this disastrous cut to London’s schools?

Written response from the Mayor

I wrote to the Secretary of State for Education to express my strong concerns about the funding formula changes, before the Government published its schools funding formula consultation document in December.

 

At my Education Conference last month, I stated that there is no doubt that the funding proposals put forward by Government will cause an education crisis for the capital.

 

I have also responded formally to the Government’s consultation and am seeking a meeting with the Secretary of State for Education.

 

 

 

GLA procurement

Question No: 2017/1811

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0586:

‘What is your estimate of the effect of the post-Brexit drop in the value of Stirling on GLA’s future procurement?’

Your response being:

‘Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly’.

Will you now provide a substantive reply?

Written response from the Mayor

Please see my response to MQ 2017/0586.

 

 

Tube Noise Complaints in London

Question No: 2017/1812

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0559:

‘Can you please give the numbers of tube noise complaints TfL have received for the past 5 years – 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 & 2016 – and their location on the tube map?’

Your response being:

‘Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly’.

Will you now provide a substantive reply?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

 

Buses on Oxford Street

Question No: 2017/0560

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2016/4844:

“If the Elizabeth Line, when open, is being used as an excuse to cut bus routes that use Oxford St, will bus passengers be able to travel on the Elizabeth Line for free for the length of Oxford St, to pick up another bus at the other end of Oxford Street?”

Your response being:

“The opening of the Elizabeth line will be the most significant transformation to transport in central London for a generation and we predict there will be a reduction in bus use along Oxford Street when it comes into operation in two years’ time. It is entirely appropriate for wider transport networks to be re-examined as part of this huge project.

We plan to consult on a scheme to transform Oxford Street next year.”

By how many and what percentage do you predict that bus use along Oxford St will reduce as a result of the Elizabeth Line; will you now answer the original substantive question,

namely ‘will bus passengers be able to travel on the Elizabeth Line for free for the length of Oxford St, to pick up another bus at the other end of Oxford Street?'; and in due course when you have cut Oxford St buses, will you provide a ‘mobility shuttle’ for disabled people?

Written response from the Mayor

The current situation of crowding, casualties and congestion on Oxford Street needs to be addressed and the opening of the Elizabeth line provides the opportunity to radically improve transport in the West End. If nothing is done, there would be a serious risk of over-crowding, worsening traffic congestion and further reduced air quality in the future. This is why I am absolutely committed to the transformation of Oxford Street. TfL and Westminster City Council are working on proposals to transform the district, by significantly reducing traffic volumes.

 

These proposals will improve the public realm, create a more pedestrian-friendly environment, support business growth, create jobs, improve air quality and deliver improved neighbourhoods for residents.

 

The levels of street clutter and crowding currently experienced on Oxford Street are significant deterrents to visiting the street for those with reduced mobility. The new, accessible Elizabeth line stations at Bond Street and Tottenham Court Road will improve access, however, I agree that access for those who arrive by bus or taxi or who require Blue Badge parking must key considerations of the transformation plan.

 

Considering the needs of all London’s residents and visitors, including those with reduced mobility, is essential. An Equalities Impact Assessment will be commissioned to assist with the development of the proposals and TfL and Westminster City Council are engaging with accessibility organisations. It is too early to say whether or not a mobility shuttle will be the best way to ensure the full accessibility of Oxford Street, but I encourage you to participate in the consultation process for this transformative scheme.

 

There are no proposals to provide free or reduced rate travel on the Elizabeth line beyond the existing wide range of schemes such as the Freedom Pass, Travelcards and daily capping.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crossrail 2

Question No: 2017/1814

Andrew Dismore

Do you agree that without Crossrail 2, London will face daily closures due to overcrowding at key stations?

Written response from the Mayor

Yes. TfL’s modelling demonstrates serious crowding and regular station closures at 17 central London stations including Euston, Victoria, Clapham Junction and Waterloo without Crossrail 2. The project is vital to prevent London’s transport network from grinding to a halt.

 

 

 

HS2 [1]

Question No: 2017/1815

Andrew Dismore

Do you agree that without Crossrail 2 any passenger time savings from HS2 will be lost as a result of onward delays and tube station closures  at Euston; and that pending Crossrail 2, the best solution to avoid such an impact on both HS2 and existing passengers at Euston is for a temporary terminus  for HS2 at Old Oak Common?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

HS2 [2]

Question No: 2017/1816

Andrew Dismore

Do you agree that there are many reasons why Old Oak Common should be designated as a temporary terminus for HS2 but high among them are that by delaying High Speed Rail services into Euston until Crossrail 2 services commence this also offers the dual benefits of (a) allowing agencies to work together to integrate the different construction schemes to help mitigate some of the disruption and; (b) helping to significantly reduce crowding particularly on the already overstretched Northern and Victoria line services during peak periods, which will make transiting through Euston that much easier for passengers. Will you make further representations to the Secretary of State for Transport to ensure the Government hears this message loud and clear?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

HS2 [3]

Question No: 2017/1817

Andrew Dismore

Will you seek urgent clarification from the Government about their plans to move the HS2 tunnel portals in Camden from the top of Parkway to a location south of Mornington Street Bridge – several hundred metres nearer to the station – and which would have the potential to greatly reduce the levels of damage and disruption to residents of Camden in and around the approaches to the station?

Written response from the Mayor

The plans you refer to relate to a requirement by the Secretary of State for High Speed 2 (HS2) Ltd to mitigate impacts on residents, businesses, and the public by retaining the existing bridges at Hampstead Road, Granby Terrace, and Mornington Street.

 

TfL understands that the design currently being developed by HS2 Ltd proposes relocation of the tunnel portal to south of Mornington Street Bridge, meaning that the three bridges can be retained. HS2 Ltd has my support to develop this option further, with the aim of reducing any impact on the local community as much as possible.

 

 

 

Barking-to-Gospel Oak line

Question No: 2017/1818

Andrew Dismore

The 14-mile Barking-to-Gospel Oak line has reopened after a nine-month £130million upgrade, but is soon to close again because of a catalogue of errors by Network Rail. Why did this occur; for how long will it close; and what compensation to regular passengers and to the GLA will be made by Network Rail?

Written response from the Mayor

As Mike Brown, TfL Commissioner, told the London Assembly Transport Committee on Thursday 2 March, TfL has expressed concerns on behalf of its customers at the highest level in Network Rail and has stressed the importance of a robust plan to complete the remaining work.

 

A comprehensive review into why Network Rail was unable to complete the project within the original timeframe is underway and they will share the outcome as soon as possible. Network Rail has publicly apologised and has stated that an updated programme is imminent. Once that plan has been confirmed, TfL will provide detailed guidance to customers and others who are affected.

 

TfL is seeking to recover its losses from Network Rail. Funds recovered will be used to provide replacement buses and customer information.

 

 

 

TfL earnings

Question No: 2017/1819

Andrew Dismore

In the year 2015/16, how many TfL staff received more than £100,000 in remuneration including, but not limited to, overtime, bonuses, and other salary supplements; and how many are expected to earn over £100, 000 in the current financial year to the end of March 2017?

Written response from the Mayor

The number of TfL staff receiving remuneration of £100,000 or more in 2015/16 was 402 as detailed on page 179 of its annual report (http://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-annual-report-2015-16.pdf).

 

The 2016/17 statutory accounts will be published in draft in June.

 

 

 

Golders Green Station

Question No: 2017/1820

Andrew Dismore

The rear entrance to Golders Green Station at Finchley Road immediately adjacent to the 102 and H2 bus stop was closed several years ago, meaning bus users on these routes have to waste approximately 5 minutes in order to reach the front entrance to the station. Will you ask TFL to reopen this rear entrance and if not, why?

Written response from the Mayor

TfL has to prioritise its spending and, at the current time, the money that would be needed to re-open the rear entrance at Golders Green could be better used to make improvements elsewhere, to the benefit of a greater number of customers.

 

Re-opening this entrance after 20 years of disuse would require significant cost to demolish the offices that have been constructed, install and staff the gateline, install a secure staffing area, and modernise the CCTV and lighting.

 

TfL will however continue to keep this under review to ensure that it is making the best use of its assets and maximising value for customers.

 

 

 

Congestion charge [1]

Question No: 2017/1821

Andrew Dismore

Do any embassies and high commissions recognise the congestion charge, and pay it regularly; and if so which ones?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Congestion charge [2]

Question No: 2017/1822

Andrew Dismore

Which embassies and high commissions refuse to pay the congestion charge?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Congestion charge [3]

Question No: 2017/1823

Andrew Dismore

What is the total debt owed to London for the congestion charge by embassies, high commissions and their staff?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Congestion charge [4]

Question No: 2017/1824

Andrew Dismore

What progress is being made by the Foreign Secretary in instituting proceedings at the International Court of Justice to clarify the law regarding diplomatic immunity in order to force recalcitrant governments to pay the congestion charge?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Parking and traffic tickets (1)

Question No: 2017/1825

Andrew Dismore

Do any embassies and high commissions pay TfL parking and traffic tickets regularly; and if so which ones?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Parking and traffic tickets (2)

Question No: 2017/1826

Andrew Dismore

Which embassies and high commissions refuse to pay TfL parking and traffic tickets?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

TfL parking and traffic tickets (3)

Question No: 2017/1827

Andrew Dismore

What is the total debt owed to London for TfL parking and traffic tickets by embassies, high commissions and their staff?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

T charge

Question No: 2017/1828

Andrew Dismore

Have Embassies and High Commissions a) been notified of the forthcoming T charge ; and b) agreed that they and their diplomatic staff should pay the T charge when introduced; c) if not why not; and d) if any have indicated they will not pay, which are they?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

 

 

Pedestrian crossing in Wood Street High Barnet

Question No: 2017/0563

Andrew Dismore

What public consultation did TfL undertake with High Barnet local residents, pensioner organisations, and with any users of the crossing, particularly the parents of the numerous small children who use the playground which is just inside the Old Court House Recreation Ground, about the changes to the crossing?

Written response from the Mayor

This is a much-improved pedestrian crossing which now complies with Department for Transport regulations and is safer than the crossing it replaced. The works at this location were part of TfL’s annual modernisation programme.

 

TfL consulted with London Borough of Barnet officers about the changes and the borough supported the proposals.

 

TfL will continue to monitor this location to ensure the crossing is operating both safely and correctly.

 

 

 

A5 bus routes

Question No: 2017/1830

Andrew Dismore

TfL has decided to cut/shorten various of our bus routes especially on the A5 in spite of overwhelming opposition to all parts of their proposals and as the curtailment of the 189 leaves no step-free access to Oxford Street east of Selfridges for passengers from there thus denying access to Oxford Street to the less mobile, and with no bus going east of the main A5 from Cricklewood/Kilburn, what reassurances can you give to passengers so inconvenienced?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Camden Street

Question No: 2017/1831

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0253:

‘The lack of pedestrian crossing on the east side of the Camden St/Camden Rd junction is proving very difficult for the school commute for children and their families from Hawley and St Martin’s Primary Schools. Will you ensure that officers from TfL actively propose improvements to pedestrian crossings as part of their ongoing review of traffic flow in the area?’

Your response being:

‘Transport for London has undertaken design work on a scheme to reduce road danger on Camden Road. Options for improved pedestrian facilities at the junction of Camden Street and Camden Road will be considered as part of future refinement of this design, and I have asked TfL to do all it can to prioritise pedestrians as part of this scheme. Funding for the construction of the Camden Road scheme has been included in TfL’s five year business plan’.

When do you envisage this work being done as part of the 5 year plan; and when do you envisage construction work on the scheme to be done?

Written response from the Mayor

TfL is working now on developing a set of proposals for improved pedestrian crossing facilities at the junction of Camden Street and Camden Road.

 

While the timetable for construction is yet to be confirmed, and depends on further design and approvals, delivery is currently planned to coordinate with other planned works in the Camden area in 2020.

 

TfL will however look at opportunities to bring this forward, if at all possible.

 

 

 

Archway traffic scheme bus and motorcycle collision

Question No: 2017/1832

Andrew Dismore

Are you aware that on 15 February 2017 in your new Archway traffic scheme, very recently introduced despite huge public opposition, there was a collision between a  motorcyclist  and a bus resulting in serious injury to the motorcyclist. In light of this crash, will you now urgently review this traffic scheme?

Written response from the Mayor

I was very sorry to hear of this collision. While it is difficult to comment on individual incidents, particularly when investigations are continuing, the Archway scheme and the new road layout has been subject to a robust road safety audit of the highest standard throughout its design and construction.

 

TfL is closely monitoring the new highway layout and is working with the Police to understand the specific circumstances of this incident. Any recommendations resulting from the investigation will of course be treated with the utmost urgency.

 

 

 

PCN mitigation

Question No: 2017/1833

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0561

‘In a recent case involving one of my constituents, it transpires that local authorities, who do not accept PCN appeal representations solely based on mitigating factors, are not making clear to those appealing in their rejection letters that the London Tribunal does not accept mitigating factors as a  ground to cancel  a PCN. Residents are thus erroneously led to make a further appeal to the Tribunal when they have zero chance of success, and so end up having to pay the full penalty fare instead of the discounted early pay rate. Will you undertake to write to all Councils in London to advise them that they should make clear in their appeal rejection letters that appeals solely based on mitigating factors are not accepted by London Tribunals as a ground for cancelling a PCN, which will save Londoners money?’

Your response being:

‘All London enforcing authorities, including TfL, have a duty to inform customers of their statutory rights in relation to the process for appealing a PCN. The decision to exercise those rights remains entirely with the PCN recipient. The information contained in the Notice of Rejection letters from enforcing authorities is a matter for the individual boroughs, authorities and London Councils.

In February, the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO) published a report on its investigation into ensuring good practice in the management of parking and traffic penalties. One of the report’s findings was that Councils should do more to inform motorists of their rights when issuing parking and traffic penalties, including providing clear and transparent information to improve trust between motorists and authorities and to save motorists from paying unnecessary charges. I support the LGO’s findings and, as the Joint Committee for London with respect to parking and traffic enforcement, I urge London Councils to note these findings.

London enforcing authorities must also sign up to London Councils’ Code of Practice as a condition of enforcement.’

Does this London Councils’ Code of Practice advise Councils in London that they should make clear in their appeal rejection letters that appeals solely based on mitigating factors are not accepted by London Tribunals as a ground for cancelling a PCN; and do you agree that if it doesn’t, it should; and if Councils do not do this, do you agree that they are not giving motorists a fair crack of the whip by effectively preventing them paying the discounted ticket price  in the false hope that mitigating factors  will be taken into account on appeal, when they won’t?

Written response from the Mayor

London Councils publishes its Codes of Practice on its website:

http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/services/parking-services/parking-and-traffic/parking-information-professionals.

 

However, as I said in my response to MQ 2017/0561, the content of their Notice of Rejection is a matter for individual boroughs. The London Tribunals appeal form that authorities are obliged to enclose with a Notice of Rejection clearly advises Appellants that the Adjudicator can only allow an appeal on specific grounds.

 

 

 

Restorative justice

Question No: 2017/1834

Andrew Dismore

For each of the last three years, how much was MOPAC awarded by the Government for restorative justice; and what happened to any underspend?

Written response from the Mayor

MOPAC is allocated an annual grant by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) for the provision of victims’ services and such services may include the provision of restorative justice (RJ).

 

However, the MOJ have not applied a ring-fence to this fund for the sole purpose of commissioning RJ services and MOPAC receives no RJ-specific grant.

 

I am committed to providing high quality services that meet victims’ needs and through MOPAC have committed £1.2 million for the implementation of a London Restorative Justice Service – Restore:London.

 

 

 

Sick days due to depression in the Met

Question No: 2017/1835

Andrew Dismore

To what do you attribute the 15% increase in sick days due to depression in the Met; and what are you doing to ameliorate this?

Written response from the Mayor

It is not yet clear where the increase due to depression has come from, but the MPS is seeing an increase in psychological related illness.

 

Psychological ill health is more prevalent in public service industries, such as education; health and social care; and public administration and defence. There is a higher likelihood of police officers being exposed to psychological risks due to the nature of their role and hence this is an issue for all police forces and not just the MPS.

 

The MPS provides holistic support for psychological ill health through a variety of support services and initiatives, underpinned by any active treatment care from an individual’s GP and the NHS, via the Occupation Health (OH) service.

 

These initiatives include fitness for work psychological screening, peer driven psychological support techniques and 24 hr counselling support. A formal psychological trauma support programme is also in place.  All systems employed are based on clinical evidence and use a variety of established clinical impact service measures.

 

 

 

Police informants (1)

Question No: 2017/1836

Andrew Dismore

The Metropolitan police  paid £5.2m from 2011 to 2016, more than a quarter of the amount paid out nationally, to informants. What safeguards are in place to oversee such payments?

Written response from the Mayor

The payment of informant rewards within the MPS is carried out in accordance with guidance set out by the National Police Chief’s Council Manual of Minimum Standards (Covert Human Intelligence Sources- CHIS). Reward applications are supervised by an operational CHIS manager prior to submission and authorised by an officer of at least Superintendent rank.

 

Significant rewards are escalated to an NPCC officer for approval and only after validation by an independent review.

 

MOPAC’s operational oversight continues to include undercover policing.

 

 

 

Police informants (2)

Question No: 2017/1837

Andrew Dismore

What was the largest individual sum paid out to an informant from 2011 to 2016; and what result was achieved as a result of the information supplied?

Written response from the Mayor

In accordance with long-established principles and the position of National Police Chief’s Council, the MPS is unable to provide specific details of informant rewards (below the annual ‘by Force’ expenditure already published).

 

 

 

West Ham vs Chelsea football match policing

Question No: 2017/1838

Andrew Dismore

What was the cost of policing the West Ham vs Chelsea football match on 6th March 2017; and how much of that is expected to be recovered from the clubs concerned?

Written response from the Mayor

The total cost for policing the West Ham vs Chelsea football match on 6th March 2017 was £89,163 and £22,858.45 has been charged to West Ham.

 

 

 

Cost of policing London’s football matches

Question No: 2017/1839

Andrew Dismore

What steps have you and the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime taken to raise with Government the need for a change in the law so that the full cost of policing London’s football matches is  met by the clubs concerned; what meetings have you had on the issue with the Home Office; and with what result?

Written response from the Mayor

My Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and I regularly discuss MPS funding when I meet Ministers and Parliamentarians, this includes discussions around policing football matches.

 

My Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime is continuing to lobby the Home Office to allow for full cost recovery.

 

She has recently written to the Home Office on this very issue and MOPAC are making representations to the Home Office regarding how the MPS can recoup more money for policing from football clubs.

 

 

Dedicated football officers

Question No: 2017/1840

Andrew Dismore

Further to question No: 2017/0570:

‘How many dedicated football officers are there in the Met; how much of a Dedicated football officer’s time on average in each football division is spent on these duties; and who pays for this time?’

Your response being:

‘There are 15 Dedicated Football Officers in the MPS, who all fall under the MPS Public Order Branch.  They spend 100% of their working time performing this role and are paid from the MPS Public Order Branch budget’

Do you agree that if these costs were met by the football clubs who benefit   from this work and which work would not be necessary but for the clubs, 15 more officers could otherwise be patrolling the streets of London; and what steps are you taking to try tom recoup these costs from the clubs or their leagues?

Written response from the Mayor

Dedicated Football Officers (DFO) play an important role in ensuring that the MPS is able to effectively police football across London. They provide a level of expertise and professional engagement with clubs and fans which means that the MPS is best able to discharge core duties efficiently and effectively.

 

MOPAC are making representations to the Home Office regarding how the MPS can recoup more money for policing from football clubs.

 

 

 

Tasers used disproportionately

Question No: 2017/1841

Andrew Dismore

According to official figures, 40% of cases where Tasers have been  used in London  since 2014 involved people of black or mixed white and black ethnicities  suggesting that black and mixed-race people in London  who comprise 15.6% of London’s population have been disproportionately Tasered since 2014. Why, and what is being done about it?

Written response from the Mayor

My Police and Crime Plan puts reducing inequality and disproportionality at the heart of our approach for the next four years. MOPAC have published Taser statistics via the Intrusive Tactics dashboard since May 2015 and will continue to monitor Taser deployment statistics to hold the MPS to account.

 

Current statistics, to September 2016, shows that black and mixed race individuals were subject to 41% of all Taser deployments, slightly below the proportion of white individuals. However, deployments of Taser do not equate to incidents – for example – if two Taser equipped officers attend an incident then this would be recorded as two deployments. A deployment does not necessarily refer to when a Taser is fired.

 

Deployments are split into seven categories with the four key actions defined as:

 

  • Drawn: Removed from holster.
  • Aimed: Pointed at an individual/subject.
  • Red Dot: Pointed at an individual/subject with red dot laser sight active, so red dot appears.
  • Fired: Cartridge attached. Taser switched on & trigger squeezed causing cartridge to fire.

 

Incident level data from January to September 2016 shows that 11% of deployments against black subjects result in a Taser being fired, with the figure for white subjects being 14%.

Earlier this month, the Home Secretary announced that police forces will be required to collect and publish detailed data on all use of force, including Taser usage.

 

 

 

Met‘s Special Enquiry Team

Question No: 2017/1842

Andrew Dismore

When was the Special Enquiry Team formed? What is the function of the SET? What cases and what types of cases has it been allocated in each of the last 5 years?

Written response from the Mayor

The Special Enquiry Team has been in existence for approximately 15 years.

 

The function of the Special Enquiry Team is to investigate sensitive and confidential enquiries within London involving high profile subjects and politically exposed persons, which require specialist investigations.  It function is also to investigate allegations relating to offences committed by those in public office and/or on the Parliamentary Estate where the matter relates to the disclosure of their duties as a public official. It also investigates allegations of electoral fraud and malpractice.

 

Since 2013 the Special Enquiry Team has investigated over 170 recorded criminal offences; a significant number of other allegations have been assessed but did not result in a criminal investigation.  This has included investigations into allegations of bribery, perjury, theft, misconduct in public office, perverting the course of justice, electoral fraud and malpractice, blackmail, harassment, malicious communications and offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act.

 

 

 

Metropolitan Police procurement

Question No: 2017/1843

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0580:

‘What is your estimate of the effect of the post-Brexit drop in the value of Stirling on the Met’s future procurement of a) vehicles and b) marine craft?’

Your response being:

‘Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly’.

Will you now provide a substantive reply?

Written response from the Mayor

Please see my response to MQ 2017/0580.

 

 

 

Merged Met Borough pilots

Question No: 2017/1844

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0592:

‘By what objective criteria will the success (or otherwise) of the merged Met Borough pilots be assessed and measured?’

Your response being

‘Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly’.

Will you now provide a substantive reply?

Written response from the Mayor

Please see my response to MQ 2017/0592.

 

 

 

 

 

Detectives in the Met

Question No: 2017/0595

Andrew Dismore

By how many detectives is the Met short of what is needed; and what are you doing to fill the gap?

Written response from the Mayor

I meet regularly with the MPS Commissioner to discuss issues of policing and workforce, and my Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, Sophie Linden, receives regular updates on workforce strength from the MPS.

 

The MPS is currently circa 748 detectives under strength from its current design. At January 2017 there were 4,770 Detectives in total. Detective numbers in the MPS are being increased by direct recruitment and the progression of existing officers into the Criminal Investigation Department (CID).

 

A Diamond Group chaired by AC Patricia Gallan is making progress in tackling the deficit. This group meets monthly to discuss the barriers for detectives and how the MPS can further address future recruitment and retention.

 

Initiatives include: the recruitment of investigative coaches from 1st Feb to support Trainee Detective constables (TDCs) and future external entry detectives; funding to provide a two-day course to aid officers sitting the National Investigators Exam (NIE) in March; and streaming officers when they join as police constable recruits onto a TDC pathway.

 

In addition to this, the aspiration will be to recruit 160 Direct Entry Detectives each year, in addition to internal recruitment and the development of MPS staff into the rank of Detective.

 

 

 

 

President Trump’s state visit

Question No: 2017/1846

Andrew Dismore

As the Government, even on their own figures, already short change London over the NICC Capital City and given that the Met’s resources are already overstretched, do you agree that the Government should pay the policing costs, which will inevitably be substantial, given his controversial opinions and statements, for President Trump’s state visit as a special grant in addition to the NICC?

Written response from the Mayor

Firstly, and as you are aware, I am in complete agreement with you over London’s unfair allocation of the NICC grant. My Deputy Mayor, Sophie Linden, and I are continuing to lobby the Government on this and Sophie raised it at her recent meeting with Brandon Lewis MP, Minister for Policing.

 

However, in order to receive a special grant, and thus for the Government to foot the bill, the cost of the visit would need to exceed 1% of our total budget. This amounts to more than £300million.

 

Although we still cannot speculate as to what the cost might be, I think it is unlikely to meet this threshold.

 

Regardless, this does not detract from our need to lobby the Government to ensure a fair funding deal for London and I will continue to do this.

 

 

 

Forensic reports

Question No: 2017/1847

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0605:

‘What is the average time for a) digital forensic reports and b) scientific forensic reports to be provided?’

Your response being:

‘The estimated time for digital forensic reports is 7-10 days. This includes work undertaken on self-service kiosks and the most complex digital examinations.

The estimated time for scientific forensic reports is 67 days. This includes urgent submissions, completed in 48 hours, through to complex scientific cases that involve multiple submissions and different forensic disciplines.’

What are the implications of these waits for evidence for the Met in light of  the forthcoming new rules on time limits for police bail?

Written response from the Mayor

Officers are drafting a response which will be sent shortly.

 

 

 

Drugs and alcohol support workers

Question No: 2017/1848

Andrew Dismore

Further to Question No: 2017/0606:

‘Is MOPAC cutting funding for drugs and alcohol support workers embedded in custody suites, and if so by how much and why?’

Your response being:

‘Responsibility for commissioning alcohol and drug workers in MPS custody suites lies with the local authorities.

MOPAC funds the local authorities through the London Crime Prevention Fund (LCPF). I have protected and maintained the LCPF at £72m over the next four years, despite continued pressures on the police budget.

The majority of the LCPF is direct funding to local authorities, who have discretion to allocate this to local priorities aligned to the Police and Crime Plan.

MOPAC also funds a minimum of £1.5m for MPS drug testing in police custody suites.

MOPAC will be working with Local Authorities, MPS, NHS England and Public Health England to review London drug treatment and testing arrangements. This will aid future funding and commissioning decisions.’

In light of and despite  your protection of  the LCPF, have any local authorities cut funding for drugs and alcohol support workers embedded in custody suites, and if so by how much and which ones?

Written response from the Mayor

MOPAC is currently agreeing Local Authority spend for 2017/18 – 2018/19 as part of the London Crime Prevention Fund.

 

Responsibility for commissioning alcohol and drug workers in MPS custody suites lies with Local Authorities, and boroughs may use their LCPF funding but also potentially other funding sources too. Therefore you will need to contact boroughs directly to understand if there have been any changes to how they fund drug and alcohol support workers.

 

MOPAC will be working with Local Authorities, MPS, NHS England and Public Health England to review London drug treatment and testing arrangements. This will aid future funding and commissioning decisions.

 

 

 

Met River Police branch (1)

Question No: 2017/1849

Andrew Dismore

How many officers and in what ranks comprise the establishment of the Met River Police branch?

Written response from the Mayor

In total there are 65 Officers in the MPS Marine Policing Unit.

 

The rank breakdown is 2 Inspectors, 9 Sergeants and 54 Constables.

 

 

 

Met River Police branch (2)

Question No: 2017/1850

Andrew Dismore

What is the total annual revenue cost of the Met River Police branch?

Written response from the Mayor

The total annual revenue cost of the Marine Policing Unit is £4.4 million.

 

 

 

Met Mounted Police branch (1)

Question No: 2017/1851

Andrew Dismore

How many officers and in what ranks comprise the establishment of the Met Mounted Police branch?

Written response from the Mayor

In total in the MPS Mounted Branch there are 142 Officers.

 

The rank breakdown is: 4 Inspectors, 17 Sergeants and 121 Constables.

 

 

 

Met Mounted Police branch (2)

Question No: 2017/1852

Andrew Dismore

What is the total annual cost of the Met Mounted Police branch?

Written response from the Mayor

The total annual revenue cost of the MPS Mounted Branch is £13.78 million.

 

 

River police

Question No: 2016/2127

Andrew Dismore

How many police launches are there in the Met., and what is the annual cost of keeping a launch operational?

Written response from the Mayor

The MPS Marine Policing Unit has one ‘Launch’ which is a Targa 37 command and control vessel.  The remainder of the fleet is made up of five Targa 31’s and three ‘Delta’ Rigid Hull Inflatable Boats. The annual fuel costs for all vessels is approx £130,000.  Servicing is in line with manufacturers’ recommendations at 100 hours and 800 hours usage, and costs are £281 & £2800 respectively.  This reflects parts only, as any labour is financed centrally and fluctuates according to work required.  The launch averages 500 hours per annum.

 

 

 

 

FacebookTwitterLinkedInShare