Hosting the Olympics a year ago was far more expensive than was necessary, or originally budgeted for. Tessa Jowell claimed it would cost £2.4 billion but it ended up nearly quadruple the amount at £8.8 billion.
However, it does seem to have produced some long-term benefit from tourism. This was not just during the games but is evidently more lasting.
I am very pleased to announce in a final rebuttal to some of the gloomadon poppers and some of the naysayers, the tourism figures for last year and for the first quarter of 2013. i.e. the first post-Olympic tourism figures that we have seen, really do knock spots off previous Olympic experience in other Olympic cities.
We have seen 3.4 million visitors come to London in the first three months of this year, a 4.2% increase on the same period last year, so I pay tribute to London & Partners and to everybody involved in that exercise and to everybody who takes part in our tourism industry.
Of course it wasn't just the money. There was the pride and enjoyment. There is still the question of whether we could have had all that, just as much revenue for tourism and so on, but managed to deliver the Games for rather less than £8.8 billion.
Roger Evans, the Police and Crime Spokesman for the Conservatives on the London Assembly, says its's good the crime level is falling - but too much of it is still ignored by the police
There are currently two big ‘C’ words hovering around the debate on policing - ‘Corruption’ and ‘Cuts’. However, crime is actually going down and corruption is finally being exposed and tackled as never before. One of my main concerns is ‘Confidence’ and this is affected by how police respond to crime when it is reported to them.
The majority of us have been, or know someone who has been, a victim of acquisitive crime. My own property has been broken into and burgled, and I have friends and constituents whose cars have vanished after a night out or whose mobiles have been grabbed from their hands. Yet time and time again I am told by victims that, in spite of available witnesses, noted down number plates, trackable phones or CCTV of the crime, the police too often do not pursue this evidence.
The police claim they investigate all crimes but that only a “number…will require secondary investigation.” In layman’s terms this means that all crimes undergo an initial ‘assessment’ to establish whether the crime is "detectable" and therefore worthy of actually investigating, by looking at CCTV and gathering other evidence. Too often the police decide not to carry out this second investigation. They claim this is because the crime was not “detectable”. Yet how can they be so sure without looking at the available evidence to actually ‘detect’ it? CCTV is everywhere.
In 2007 it was claimed that the UK had one per cent of the world's population but 20% of its CCTV cameras. We are told it is for our safety. Yet, apart from during the summer riots of 2011 - where it was used to catch many thieves and burglars - CCTV is rarely used.
The figures are worrying. The police are effective at responding to homicide and rape cases and none of these cases are screened-out, which should always be the case. However acquisitive crime is less of a priority. In London, 40 per cent of house burglaries, 23 per cent of robberies, 81 per cent of bike thefts and 76 per cent of car thefts were not investigated last year.
The figures may well be even worse outside London - where 40 per cent of all crimes are screened-out – since in the rest of the country over half (55 per cent) of all crimes are not properly investigated. This sends a heartening message to any thief or burglar, that they can rest assured that many of their crimes will be ignored by police!
Some commentators may try to blame this predicament on budget cuts and a lack of resources. But they are wrong. This has nothing to do with cuts as the police have been failing to properly investigate these types of crimes for decades. Nor does it necessarily have much to do with resources.
The police have managed to find up to £20 million to spend on the phone hacking investigation. The simple truth is this - the police often do not have the incentive to pursue acquisitive crime. It is not a high profile field but it requires laborious work to solve it.
Acquisitive crime is serious. Breaking into someone’s home or stealing something with sentimental value can have a long lasting and devastating impact on the victim’s emotional wellbeing. Stealing something valuable from a person or small business can also be seriously damaging financially. Also, many criminals’ become bolder and escalate their activities each time they get away with it, so by not taking acquisitive crime seriously, we are storing up problems for the future.
Victims of crime should be allowed the right to appeal to an independent body - such as the new local safer neighbourhood boards being introduced in London - if the police decide not to investigate their crime. Clear standards should be set so that we know why investigations are dropped.
We need a dramatic shift in the way police see these crimes. Acquisitive crime may not be sexy, but it is serious.
The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, was asked at a London Assembly meeting about extremism. Mr Johnson thought that the prison and college authorities could do more:
Firstly, universities and what is happening on campuses, I really look to vice chancellors across London to focus very hard on this issue, to look at what is happening in the societies in their universities to make sure that they are open, that they are positive activities and that they are not being infiltrated by people who could be recruiting for terrorist organisations, Al Qaeda or what have you.
Secondly, and perhaps even more important, I am concerned about recruitment in prisons, and anybody who has experience of prisons and young offenders institutions in this country will know that these are very, very fertile recruiting grounds, this is where a lot of people are infected by the virus, as it were, and I am extremely keen to make sure that, with greater Mayoral oversight of prisons, particularly in London, we can do something to ensure that radicalisation does not take place in those prisons.
Boris Johnson has previously made clear his intention to only serve two terms as Mayor of London. However this morning - in his debut as a phone in host on LBC radio - he contemplated standing again.
Asked if it was a possibility he responded:
"You mean, if it was a sort of a 'reverse Morsi' situation? If there were hundreds of thousands of people actively calling for an extension of the administration?
"The truth is that there are so many things we are trying to do at the moment that I know I am not going to be able to get in in time for 2016.
"I won't deny it, it is something I think about and something that I've even talked to friends about.
"But the reality is that after eight years you've been at it for a long time in a very big job. You see what happens to people who do things for too long. You've got to be fair to the electorate, you've got to be sure you are doing your best.
"There will come people who will have fantastic ideas and who will have fresh ways of thinking about things."
He did then add:
"The truth is, I'm stepping down in 2016. After that, who knows what will happen."
However pressed by Nick Ferrari if he could not be persuaded to stay, he added:
"It would have to be pretty massive. You really would have to get Trafalgar Square full."
Make of that what you will. It's about 18 minutes in. I think Mr Johnson would like to be Prime Minister but that he also loves being Mayor of London and would be pleased to do that for a bit longer first. It is rather insulting to local government to keep assuming that it's only point is to get experience of the important stuff in national politics.
The lobbyists for a third runway at Heathrow Airport have been raising the stakes. They say that if we had a Thames Estuary Airport instead - "Boris Island" - then Heathrow Airport would not be viable. It would have to close altogether. Over 60,000 jobs would be lost.
I was interested to see the Mayor of London Boris Johnson's response to this. At a recent London Assembly Mayor's Questions, the Conservative London Assembly member Tony Arbour was trying to be helpful:
Tony Arbour (AM): Do you not think it scandalous and outrageous, Mr Mayor, that Heathrow has recently issued a statement suggesting that Heathrow is going to be closed and there will therefore be devastation right across west London unequalled since the Luftwaffe? Do you not think that it needs to be said loudly and clearly that it has never been your intention or indeed the intention of those people who live near the airport and who are the principal protesters that Heathrow should go? What we and you have been advocating is that there be additional aircraft capacity possibly in the Thames Estuary which will take most of the traffic which goes to Heathrow but Heathrow in itself will continue to be an economic driver for west London.
Boris says London’s population will hit ten million by 2030. London also needs 400,000 new homes in the next ten years alone.
Improve transport links are vital to all this says the Mayor - calling for central government spending on Crossrail Two, along with new tube extensions and river crossings.
Boris said:
“Post-Olympic London has an amazing story to tell of a city that is leading the UK out of recession as the best place to work, live, play, study, invest and do business, and my goal is to lengthen London’s lead as the greatest city on earth. In the summer of 2012 this city put on a triumphant performance, showing us exactly what we can do if we focus and plan, and agree on the challenges facing our city, and today is my personal view of how we can work together to meet those challenges.
"To succeed we must recognise the test of our mettle that lies ahead, not least a million more people in the next decade and a vast shortage of homes in an uncompromising global economy. This shows us why the government must invest in London’s future for the good of the whole of the UK and exactly why we must continue to attract international investment. I want this vision to be one which sparks the imagination of every Londoner as well as business leaders and government officials. This is everyone’s city and all of our futures.”
Better schools, improved pubic health and more apprenticeships are all important themes. Perhaps housing is the greatest challenge. It is not just a matter of hitting some Harold Macmillan-style target for the number of "units" built ("high rise rabbit hutches" as Boris calls them) but providing homes that people want to live in:
The Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park, where we are creating a new urban district where there will be thousands of new family homes modelled explicitly on the Georgian terraces that are perhaps the most popular and sought-after homes in the city."
What impact does all this have on Boris Johnson's prospects of becoming Prime Minister? It is about proving himself to be in command of the detail. That he is a serious about policy, not just an engaging front man to undertake photo opportunities. He wrote the 82 page document himself.
Londoners have already delivered their verdict on Boris in electing and re-electing him Mayor. Today he confirmed that he will not stand for a third term. Increasingly it will be the national verdict on his record in London that counts.
Richard Tracey, the Conservative Transport Lead on the London Assembly, wants a vote in Parliament on banning tube strikes so we can see which MPs stand up for Londoners
When did Bob Crow, the General Secretary of the RMT Union, last compare you to Hitler? For me and my Conservative colleagues on the London Assembly the answer is 'last Monday' when we released ‘Struck Out’, a report suggesting an alternative to strike action on the London Underground. 'Struck Out' makes the case for Parliament to pass legislation banning strike action on the Tube. In return transport unions would gain the right to binding pendulum arbitration if 50%+1 of their Members voted to take a dispute to that stage. The report finds that 59% of Londoners believe it is too easy to strike with only 14% believing that it’s too difficult.
Binding Pendulum Arbitration (BPA) would entail an independent arbiter choosing between two competing positions. So if Transport for London (TfL) calls for a pay freeze for Tube workers and the RMT want a 10% increase the arbiter would have to decide between those options. He cannot suggest a compromise. The result of this is that both parties have an incentive to be reasonable. Under BPA, calling for a ridiculous wage increase is not shrewd negotiating; it is simply a way of ensuring your opponent wins.
The current system - allowing a few unions to exploit their monopolistic position to squeeze ever more money out of London fare-payers and taxpayers by almost constantly threatening strike action - effectively encourages extremism. The unions who aim for the highest possible pay increases for their Members are likely to end up being most successful irrespective of the cost to ordinary Londoners.
The London Assembly has 25 members, nine of who are Conservatives. That means that the combined forces of Labour, the Lib Dems and the Green Party will not be able to muster a two thirds majority to scupper the Mayor of London Boris Johnson's Council Tax precept cut of 1.3%. So that is good news for the five million Council Taxpayers in the capital. In Harrow and Kingston it will be more than cancelled out by tax rises from the borough councils. In Hounslow and Hammersmith and Fulham the borough councils will be providing a further saving.
Labour have objected that a 1.3% cut is a footling sum. So they proposed a amendment not to cut the Council Tax at all.
The Conservatives on the London Assembly offered a different approach. They called on Boris to go further and cut the Council Tax precept by 3.5%. This would be financed by ending the extraordinary perk where Transport for London staff are not only given free travel but allowed to nominate a "significant other" also to have free travel:
Good news for Council Taxpayers in the capital. The Mayor of London Boris Johnson is cutting his share of the Council Tax precept by In his draft budget the Mayor sets out his intention to reduce the Greater London Authority share of the Council Tax bill by 1.2% from April. If the budget is approves it means the bill for a Band D property falling from £306.72 to £303.00. It follows a 1% cut in this financial year.
It means Boris has either frozen or reduced the precept every year since his election in 2008. He is pledged to reduce the GLA share of the council tax bill by 10 per cent over his second term as Mayor; and has already cut his share by 20 per cent in real terms since becoming Mayor.
The budget plans to maintain the police at 32,000 while rationalising the Metropolitan Police and London Fire Brigade buildings.
Boris says:
“Against a difficult economic background my planned budget will cut council tax while making significant strides in growing our economy, fighting crime and improving transport. Next year the Government will carry out its spending review and I will continue to champion the capital to ensure we get the funding necessary to support the economy and quality of life in this great city.”
Victory in London: The inside story of the Boris campaign by Alex Crowley (Bretwalda Books. £17.99)
This is a story with a happy ending. Really two happy endings - as for your money you have an account of the first Boris Johnson victory of 2008, as well as the re-election that took place this year.
Included are some memos from Boris to his team in 2007 explaining why he wanted to be Mayor. Boris wrote:
"I want to be the mayor who CHAMPIONS AMBITION, and that means helping young kids cheat the dreadful fate of being sucked into a gang. This is where I think I can make the biggest difference to London, and I want as many policies as possible aimed at the INEQUALITY OF AMBITION. I have had a very privileged and very lucky life - and I want kids across London to have the kind of chances I have had. I will use sport, and art, and whatever powers I have over education and skills to help achieve this. That is the chief objective of my mayoralty."
In the same document, Boris said of the incumbent Ken Livingstone:
"He is no longer sticking up for the little guy against the system. He is the system. He has morphed into the ruling class like the pigs in Animal Farm. He sits like Smaug on the great heap of GOLD he has accumulated from the FINES (why don't we have a poster of a giant newt coiled avariciously around our dosh) - contrast my more generous regime, which will give people more time to pay and will be less brutal and fascistic and dictatorial."
Subscribe to this blog's feed
