MANIFESTO
|
Warwick Lightfoot |
A Manifesto For London: World Class Services For The World’s Greatest City
Warwick Lightfoot for Mayor of London
I want London to be a dynamic, and exciting place in which to live, work and visit. We need a Mayor to champion London and its world-class financial markets, with the vision to ensure that they are matched by world-class public services and opportunities for everyone. London is a great city, but clearly has big problems - from crime to low rates of employment in some communities. London needs a Mayor who will get a grip on these problems. I want a London where people can find well-paid work, and where there are plenty of opportunities for everyone. I want a London that is a pleasant, attractive and greener place. A better London in which to live in and to raise a family, with the homes and good quality schools that families’ need. I want a London that is a safer and more secure place to live, where there is less crime and vandalism. I want a London where there are more police on our streets and where more criminals get caught and punished. We need a Mayor with imagination, vision and a radical agenda of fundamental reform to improve London’s public services.
My Vision for London: A prosperous, vital metropolis for everyone
London is the world’s megalopolis. London is a series of villages and discrete communities that combine into a unique footprint: as a capital city; as a world financial centre; and as a city where the work of the arts, cultural institutions, media and creative industries lead the world. Today London has the world’s most successful and innovative financial markets and the most lively and dynamic arts and creative industries. London is not just a world leader in finance and the arts, but also in the sciences and in the field of medical research, with one of the greatest concentrations of scientific research and scholarship in any city on the planet.
People want to work and live in London, because it is a thriving, prosperous and exciting place to be. London’s prosperity is built upon its financial markets and London’s creative industries and cultural institutions are at the heart of the metropolis’s vitality. I will work to promote them. I want to make London, a pleasanter and greener place in which to live and work and an easier place for people to move around in. London should be a friendlier place in which to lead a family life and in which to raise children. We need more homes for families, better transport, additional parks and more trees. We need less waste, better quality air to breath and an integrated approach to regeneration, which recognises that, on their own, bricks and mortar do not make a community.
My priority will be to tackle crime. Londoners want world-class public services that match London’s status as an international financial centre and capital city. They also want value for money and their council tax bills to be controlled. We will not create high quality public services and value for money in London without radical public service reform.
The heart of my campaign for London is public service reform. A review of the operation of the Police Act and fundamental improvements in the management of the Metropolitan Police Authority. A root and branch improvement in the management of London Underground and a radical reassessment of the framework of legislation relating to strikes in essential services.
My vision of London is a vision of a great city that is truly exciting in its cultural vitality and diverse communities, with a dynamic economy that generates wealth and jobs for everybody. My ambition is for an electric, vital city where no community or individual is left behind.
Tackling Crime and Making London Safe
Crime is too high and too many people experience fear of crime and anti-social behaviour in their neighbourhoods. The public have lost confidence in the criminal justice system: the police; the Crown Prosecution Service; the courts and judges; and the Probation Service. Londoners are frustrated when they are told that reported crime statistics are falling, because they experience repeated difficulty in getting through to the police to report crime. The public, moreover, know that with detection rates of less than 20 per cent in London there is little chance of much being done about the crimes they do report.
Along with the judges and everyone else in the criminal justice system, the police, have lost the confidence of the public. It is not just the important question of whether the police have lost the trust of certain ethnic or religious communities. The police as an organisation are also losing the overall confidence of the public at large.
The public want more police on their streets, out and about on the beat. They want locally based police, who know and understand their patch and who will respond to gangs on estates. The public want the police, as an organisation, to respond to the policing priorities of local communities. In short, the public want less crime and more criminals caught, prosecuted and convicted. This will require fundamental reform of the police and making the police politically accountable to the Mayor of London.
Review working of the Police Act
The Metropolitan Police need to be made politically accountable to Londoners in an effective way and the police need to do more to respond to public concerns about vandalism, graffiti and anti-social behaviour. There needs to be a fundamental review of police recruitment, training, promotion, management and incentives. This review must include an examination of the Police Act to identify where it hinders the effective management of the Police. Too many police officers do not really know the boroughs and communities they work in. They have an incentive ‘to move out, to move up’. I want successful police officers to have real career and promotion opportunities by remaining in one place for a much longer period of time.
London needs better managed Tube and Bus Services
London’s public transport services need fundamental reform if spending on and investment in them is to yield the benefits that London needs. London’s public services need to be run in a modern, professional and competent manner. The management of Transport for London needs to become more rigorous in the manner it approaches employee relations. As Mayor, I would urge the Government to look again at the legal framework for employee relations in essential public services.
Review Industrial Relations Law on Strikes in Essential Services
Huge amounts of Londoners’ money are being poured into the Tube. Given the volume of investment and the amount of public money being spent on the Underground there is little to show for it in terms of service improvement for the travelling public. We need to ensure that Londoners and taxpayers get better value for money from the investment in the London Underground. There are too many strikes and threatened stoppages of work. In the context of this huge public investment, there must be better and more effective employee relations. This will require a review of the framework of law governing employee relations and strikes in essential public services.
Value for Money and Conductors on Our Buses
The subsidy given by the London taxpayer to bus operators has risen from £50 million to almost £700 million since 2001. There are more buses, but the quality of service does not match the increase in spending. We need conductors on buses. We need better-trained drivers who drive more safely and with consideration for their passengers. And there needs to be proper ventilation on buses. For a start it would be helpful to have enough windows that open to create a draught as the bus moves.
Mayor’s Record: Trebling the Budget without getting value for money
The total budget of the Mayor has roughly trebled from £3.7 billion to £10.7 billion since 2001. The part of the London council tax accounted for by the Mayor’s budgets, the so-called ‘precept’ on a band D Council Tax has risen from £122.98p to £303.87p this financial year. But Londoners are not getting enough to show as a result of this extra spending. London needs more government grant to spend on modernising and improving its public services. London needs to receive a fairer share of the taxes it pays to national government. London makes up 12.5 per cent of the UK population but contributes about 19 per cent of total national tax revenue. So far, the recent massive increase in spending by Ken Livingstone has not resulted in value for money for the London taxpayer.
Zero Base Budget
Too much money has been wasted on expensive local government officers. There are now 667 local authority officers working for City Hall. In terms of local government pay scales, they are expensive. Over 100 earn more than £50,000 a year. Many of them duplicate the work of the London boroughs. They produce strategy papers on things for which the 32 London boroughs already have responsibility, such as day care services for elderly people. The expansion of employees on the Mayor’s payroll has made it more expensive and difficult for the London boroughs to recruit and retain the staff they need to deliver public services. To get value for money we need reform of London’s public services and we need a zero base budget to cut out waste in City Hall. A zero based approach to the budget will reverse the normal approach that the public sector takes to budgeting. The whole budget will be comprehensively reviewed and all spending will have to be justified not just any incremental increase.
Holding Down the Tax Bills Londoners pay
We need a Mayor who will cut Ken Livingstone’s bureaucracy and spending on City Hall management. As Mayor I would:
- cut waste by starting with a zero base budget for City Hall;
- stop replicating and duplicating the work of the London boroughs;
- get a fairer deal for London - Londoners need to keep more of the taxes they pay to central government;
- ensure that there is a proper understanding of the fact that London has greater social and economic problems than the Government appears to appreciate.
Investment in London’s Cultural and Physical Infrastructure
If London is to maintain its role in the international financial markets it will have to ensure that it has the physical and cultural infrastructure needed to attract people to live and work here. The quality of life in London is an important consideration in the choice of location for individuals and financial institutions. London needs a public infrastructure of police, transport and other public services that match the success of its financial markets. These services need to be delivered efficiently and with value for money. The Mayor of London already has strategic responsibilities for these areas and sets their budgets. If London is to have public services that match its international status as a capital city and financial centre, there will need to be a radical programme of public service reform. An important part of what makes London an attractive place to live and work in is its vibrant arts and cultural scene with the music, theatre and galleries that are integral to a sophisticated and culturally diverse city. The Mayor will be responsible for the London arts council. What London needs is a mayor who can rise to these important challenges and manage investment in London’s public services, working with the business community, the London boroughs and the Government in a practical and constructive manner.
London needs extensive investment in rail transport. The Underground is operating at close to capacity and the mainline rail network and the principal London railway stations are likewise operating close to capacity. What London needs is additional rail transport: new lines and new stations. This was recognised sixty years ago in London Transport’s first post-war plan in the late 1940s. Starting with Crossrail, London needs new rail lines from north to south and east to west, including the Chelsea-Hackney Line. London also needs both an improvement and a modernisation of its flood defences, including the Thames Barrier.
London has a specific challenge when it comes to public investment. London needs huge investment in its infrastructure. The metropolis generates the wealth and tax revenue that not only justifies such investment in terms of rigorous cost-benefit analysis and the economic and social rates of return used, but also generates the tax revenue that is needed to finance it. London’s difficulty is that it does not have direct access to the tax base that results from its economic activity. As Mayor of London I will draw up a plan setting out the strategic investment that will have to be made in London’s infrastructure over the next thirty years.
A Strategic Transport Plan for London
London needs a strategic transport plan that takes proper account of all forms of transport, from walking, to the underground and over-ground railways. The starting point has to be a safe and reliable journey. We have to find ways of better using and managing the assets that we have. We need both to manage our current infrastructure better and to identify potential assets that already exist, but are underused such as the north London railway line. We have to get the Government to agree to the financing necessary to build London’s Crossrail.
The Mayor’s strategic transport plan should be based on what Londoners and TfL’s customers tell the Mayor. In developing new bus routes and services, the Mayor must listen and respond to what the public say. TfL should be required to consult local communities properly about service delivery. Currently this is done through local authorities. Many councillors do an excellent job at spelling out the practical problems and frustrations of the travelling public, including the particular difficulties that disabled people experience. But TfL takes little notice of them. This has got to change. The TfL board should be transformed into a forum for customers to explain their retail experience. As Mayor I would strengthen London TravelWatch - the transport users group - into a body that monitors more effectively the operation of TfL from a consumer perspective.
Walking
The Mayor’s transport policy should take account of all forms of transport. A good start would be to make it easier and safer for people to walk. This means having police on local streets to prevent crime and ensuring that pedestrians have opportunities to cross busy roads and can do so without being forced to make lengthy detours through difficult underpasses - as though pedestrians are secondary users of London’s space on the pavements and roads.
Protecting the interests of all road users
Walking and cycling are excellent ways of getting around a busy urban environment. In an ideal planned urban environment pedestrians, cyclists, cars and buses would be separated in designated road space for convenience and safety. In practice, in London and particularly in central London, this is difficult and often impractical. Where there are opportunities to arrange such a separation, it makes sense to consider doing so. In principle these decisions are local and the London boroughs should be in the lead in deciding where cycle lanes and bus lanes are useful and appropriate. It is essentially a practical issue that should be decided on a case-by-case basis by local communities.
Cycling
Cycling is a good and convenient way of getting around. We need to help cyclists by making it safer and more convenient for them. Where cycle lanes can be laid out that securely separate cyclists from cars and buses they are very useful. Setting out designated cycle lanes where cars, buses and cyclists cannot be separated and are in practice be forced to share space, offers cyclists little protection or opportunity for unimpeded travel. One of the greatest contributions local authorities can offer cyclists in terms of comfort and safety is well-maintained roads without potholes and other dangerous obstacles. In terms of convenience many cyclists would appreciate places where cycles can be left securely locked while they are out and about once they have reached their destination away from home. These practical issues are essentially matters for local communities with the knowledge necessary to identify appropriate places for cycle parking. Advance stop lines that segregate cyclists ahead of traffic at traffic lights and enable them to pull away ahead and quicker than other traffic and make left hand turns more easily and safely are also valuable. Across London there are many cycle lanes that only extend for short distances, end abruptly and represent a disjointed muddle. As Mayor I will help the boroughs to co-ordinate this network.
I will encourage safe and responsible cycling. I will clamp down on inconsiderate pavement cyclists and on those who cycle without lights. Schools will be able to award or withdraw Mayor’s Cycling Awards to children. I will do more to encourage the provision of secure cycle parks near stations.
Congestion Charge and Road Pricing
The Congestion charge in central London has not worked. Despite increasing the charge from £5 to £8 and planning to double the charge from its starting point to £10, it has failed convincingly to cut congestion. The charge has damaged businesses and has put off people from travelling into the zone in the evenings and weekends when the charge does not apply, because people are unaware of the fact that that it is lifted at 6 pm and does not apply at weekends. The zone should not have been extended and the level of the charge should not be used as a revenue-raising device. The legal character of the contracts that govern the congestion charge is unclear. If it is legally practical to end the congestion charge I will consider doing so. I will look at ways of mitigating its impact.
For many years economists have advocated road pricing as a method of eliminating congestion by rationing road space by price. Ideally, differently congested roads at different times of the day would have charges levied to reflect the relative level of congestion. Until recently such schemes were impractical because the technology was not available. Today, satellite navigation technology does offer the possibility of applying a framework of sophisticated road pricing. While such a policy has many theoretical merits in the seminar room it is extremely unattractive once it is taken into the community where people have to organise their lives. The heart of such a policy is the decision to price low-income families off the road. In principle travelling on the road by car would become easier for people who can afford to pay the charge.
The practical need to use a car does not neatly correlate with income. Many low-income households are more dependent on cars than higher income households, because they have children or because they are elderly or disabled or the nature of the work they do. Moreover, for such a policy to work the charge would have to be set at a realistically high level for it significantly to impact on congestion. The present Mayor’s congestion charge clearly illustrates that. A charge of £8 a day is not sufficient to make much progress in reducing congestion. A charge that is not sufficiently high to make much dent in congestion is little more than a revenue raising tax. In practice almost all taxes in the UK that have been presented as ‘green taxes’ have been little more than window dressing to disguise a revenue raising tax increase. I therefore reject road pricing, because of its consequences for low-income families and the scope that it offers for back door taxation dressed up as a green measure.
Planning
The Mayor of London sets the strategic planning framework for London and will have powers to override the London boroughs on major developments. Planning policy directly affects local communities and it is local communities that should be at the heart of the planning process through their local borough planning committees. I will develop a strategic plan for Greater London, consulting and working together with the London boroughs, rather than in opposition to them. The Mayor’s planning powers should not be used to impose a top down plan on London’s communities. The strategic plan for London’s development should take account of London’s unique development and footprint.
London has developed organically. It is unique among cities in Europe: vast, sprawling and immensely varied. London is not the product of planners. From the start London never had a single centre. It is made up of an infinite number of different distinctive communities. These varied communities spread nearly 15 miles in every direction. Many grew up in the 19th century around railway stations. In the 20th century an important catalyst for the development of London’s communities was the location of London Underground stations.
Over the last fifty years London has changed a lot. It has gone from being an industrial metropolis to being a city based on services, particularly financial services and distribution. The docks have moved down river out of London. Financial services have become more important and extended into Canary Wharf and to the West End of London. Overall London’s centre of economic gravity has shifted to the west, reflecting the importance of the economic impact of Heathrow Airport and the M4 corridor.
Conservation should be part of a sophisticated approach to climate change
Cities are a vital part of a sustainable world. In terms of a sustainable environment, the metropolis is part of the solution rather than part of the problem of climate change. It is the very density and synergies created by city life that will enable us to manage and mitigate the challenge of climate change. And cherishing our historical building and urban inheritance should be part of a sophisticated sustainable environmental policy. Endless demolition and rebuilding ignores the energy embedied in existing buildings. It takes a barrel of oil to produce four bricks.
A sustainable community, however, has to be about more than bricks and mortar. It is about culture and communities and the social capital that comes together to form neighbourhoods. The late Jane Jacobs the urban writer and activist, who championed new, community-based approaches to planning taught us that it is familiar neighbourhoods, buildings and landmarks that give us our sense of place and belonging. When city planners destroy those landmarks and neighbourhoods they demolish much more than a building or a group of buildings: they destroy the social capital that glues cities together and makes them work. We saw this to our cost in London in the 1960s when large parts of the metropolis were demolished .The first priority of the Mayor’s planning strategy must be a commitment to avoid the mistakes of the past.
Making better use of our existing assets
The starting point should be to cherish the wonderful buildings and parks that we already have. London has 400,000 listed buildings, 860 conservation areas, three World Heritage Sites and over 600 protected squares. These are not a constraint on London’s economic vitality but one of the reasons for it. London prospers because of its historic environment. Our existing houses and buildings are an asset and an opportunity. Most of them, if properly maintained, will last indefinitely. Intelligent modernisation, adaptation and repair are a cost-effective and more sustainable way of meeting the needs of a flexible economy.
The traditional London terraced house is a template for sustainable urban living. It combines mixed uses, high densities along with street life and a sense of community. It is easier to regenerate depressed areas where the historic built environment remains in place than those areas where little survives. The terraced house has proved to be adaptable and popular. The traditional London terrace set around a garden allows people to live in high densities in an attractive and pleasant way. This lesson should inform our thinking when planning large-scale new residential development.
Global economic success is based on freedom, the rule of law, a safe and crime free community, good communications, public transport, the arts and culture. These are the things that make a city a safe and attractive place in which it is fun to live and work. A prosperous and economically dynamic metropolis is not created simply by building new glass fronted offices and skyscrapers. It is easy to mistake physical change for progress that will yield prosperity. This crude socialistic and collectivist thinking informs and misdirects too many planners, developers, architects and politicians, including the present Mayor of London.
Good Modern Design
We need good modern design and new architecture that complements our existing buildings and urban space. Without new buildings of modern design our environment will not be revitalised and refreshed. Moreover, this should not mean playing safe and encouraging poor quality, self-effacing designs.
What matters for most people living in Greater London is what they see within a quarter of an hour’s walk from their home or where they work, shop or play. We need to improve the streetscape that people experience. It is the backdrop for communities. A pleasant streetscape with a variety of shops, interesting buildings and thoughtful landscaping makes life in a city enjoyable. We need to cherish our neighbourhood shops and make our streetscapes more attractive.
London’s buildings and communities are complex and diverse. London needs a planning policy that understands its historic environment and organic growth. Neither the Labour Government nor the present Mayor understand this. Unfortunately some developers share this lack of appreciation for London’s complex historical environment. Abetted by Labour Government Ministers and the present Mayor, they have combined to destroy large parts of the metropolis.
Protecting Neighbourhood Shops and Diverse Retail Business Communities
Traditionally the planning system in England has protected buildings and broad categories of use such as residential housing, retail shopping, light industrial use and so on. Today our communities face a new challenge. The diversity and character of neighbourhood shops that make for a vibrant and interesting streetscape are under commercial siege. First, rents are rising steeply, and because they simply do not have the turnover or mark up to make it possible to pay higher commercial rents (unlike designer clothes shops) this means that many businesses, such as fishmongers, family run bakeries, specialist bookshops and antique shops have to close. The second economic factor is the complex issue of the monopoly power of the big supermarkets that undermines the commercial viability of all kinds of businesses from delicatessens to hardware shops. Much of the market power of supermarkets’ arises out of the complexities of the planning system and issues such as the availability of free car parking. The planning system needs to be modified to ensure that communities are able to take steps to protect and develop diverse and interesting shopping centres. As Mayor my first step would be to set up a London-wide Commission to look at the whole range of complex issues involved and to identify practical ways forward. Significant progress on such an agenda would require new national legislation.
Tall Buildings
London’s skyline is one of the most important dimensions of its public space. There are good tall buildings; the critical thing is where they are built. There is a place for tall buildings that are clustered together as happens at Canary Wharf. Tall buildings can be elegant, interesting and iconic, but they have to complement rather than detract from London’s historic environment. This means that we should be clear about where tall buildings will be allowed to go and where they should not be allowed to go. This needs to be spelt out in the Mayor’ planning strategy. The need for such a planning framework is all the more important, given the planning legacy of John Prescott. As Deputy Prime Minister he allowed architectural projects to go ahead and overruled his department’s own planning regulations, when it suited his fancy. While there is a case for good and valuable tall buildings in certain identified locations, there should be no return to a general policy favouring tall buildings, and no return to a policy of systematically building high-rise flats for families with children.
Advocates of tall buildings sometimes assert that they are imperative for the future of London as a global financial centre. Yet successive studies have concluded that they are not necessary. There is little evidence that London would lose jobs to other cities without them. Over the last 20 years London has flourished as a financial centre by building low-rise and medium-rise buildings. Tall buildings, moreover have done little or nothing to prevent the steady transfer of German financial business headquarters to London.
Housing Policy for London
London has a huge housing challenge. People want homes they can afford to buy. We need more homes that are large enough for families to live in. London has huge social and employment problems that result from high concentrations of social housing. There are estates throughout London where people are trapped in poverty and unemployment, dependent on means-tested benefits and detached from aspiration and opportunity. Many of London’s social and employment problems stem from misguided housing policies put in place forty to sixty years ago. These policies resulted in low-income families being concentrated in communities that have become ghettos where people are trapped in poverty and benefits.
Avoiding Mistakes of the Past
The first thing that a new Mayor should try to do is to avoid the mistakes of the past. One of the principal lessons to learn is that planners who apply a single housing model across London make mistakes. Different approaches are appropriate for different communities. There should be a variety of approaches leaving the London boroughs free to experiment in different ways that suit their local communities rather than having to conform to an overall detailed London plan.
London needs more homes, but this should not become an excuse for putting up unattractive poorly-built low quality social housing. In short, precisely the kind of housing that will create problems for the future. New housing developments should aim to create mixed communities of straightforward owner-occupiers alongside affordable homes to buy and social rented accommodation.
The need for more homes and greater housing density should not become an excuse for homes with rooms that are too small or for unattractive concrete jungles. New housing has to be built with an eye for attractive streets, garden squares, local grassed play areas that are safe and plenty of trees.
Helping People to Buy their Own Home
London’s housing investment programme should not concentrate solely on social housing for rent. Many people in London want to buy a home but cannot afford to do so. One of the distinguishing features of the London housing market is that the level of owner occupation is about a fifth lower than in the rest of the country. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation found in a survey that 500,000 people would like to buy, but cannot afford to do so. The Mayor should invest a significant part of the housing budget in affordable homes to buy and in shared equity schemes.
The Mayor’s strategic planning powers in relation to housing, and the power to allocate the public money allocated by the Government for investment in housing in London, have to be used in conjunction with the London boroughs. Local communities have to be consulted and listened to.
The present Mayor’s approach to planning and housing runs the danger of repeating the mistakes of the past. In the 1950s and 1960s, high profile Housing Ministers, such as Harold Macmillan, Sir Keith Joseph and Dick Crossman, promised to build ambitious numbers of houses. This resulted in huge estates and tower blocks that became object lessons in how not to approach housing policy, with a dreadful legacy for London in terms of complex social and community problems. Current housing policy in London concentrates on building as many houses as possible to be rented by social landlords. The principal focus is on hurriedly using land on the flood plain of the river Thames to the east of London – the Thames Gateway. There are good reasons to have reservations about this crude and clumsy approach. The emphasis on speed of construction and the number of houses raises serious issues about the quality of the homes and the nature of the communities that will be created.
London’s Centre of Gravity has shifted to the West
The strategy also raises fundamental questions about the role of planning in London. Over the last sixty years the population and economic activity has shifted from the east of London to the west of London. In terms of employment the economy has shifted from manufacturing to service and distribution. This is exemplified by the developments in the Port of London and at Heathrow airport. In the 1940s the Port of London was England’s greatest port, to-day it has gone. In contrast Heathrow has been transformed into the world’s busiest airport with all the economic and employment opportunities that implies. Yet the Mayor’s London housing strategy focuses on the east of London.
The present Mayor’s strategic approach lacks balance. London needs a housing policy that provides homes where people want to live and closer to where they are likely to work. The present plan is a recipe for repeating the mistakes made by the London County Council in building the Becontree Estate. This created Europe’s largest council estate miles from where people wanted to work and without the social infrastructure for a balanced community. Evidence has shown that tall buildings are less successful as an environment for bringing up children. As Mayor I will encourage the development of more mixed communities with a variety of housing units for rent and for sale. We must move away from the construction of large estates with no supporting infrastructure. A grand central plan for London will not work. London needs a decentralised approach that is built up from what local communities say they want, rather than a housing policy that is imposed top down from City Hall in a Soviet mode.
Cleaner, Greener, Cooler London
Where we live and work is important to all of us. Much of our personal happiness turns on the quality of life around us. Clean streets, attractive and interesting buildings, along with plenty of parks and trees transform the urban environment. We need a greener city. We need more parks and we need more trees. A greener environment can transform cities. Trees, parks, squares and gardens are important for all of us. We need more trees throughout Greater London. It is a paradox that some of the greenest parts of London with the most trees and garden squares are in the centre of London, in the most densely populated boroughs. We need a Mayor who will work to plant more trees and encourage the development of more garden squares throughout the whole of London. More parks and trees will make a contribution to cooling the climate, giving us shade when it is hot and making London more beautiful.
A Greener Healthier London and the Olympic Opportunity
Trees, parks and playgrounds play a critical part in leisure whether it is going for a walk or engaging in sport. We all need to be more active in our every day lives. My transport policy will promote walking and cycling in practical ways. Whether it is walking to the shops or going to the gym or a swimming pool, we all need to be more active. The real legacy of London’s Olympic Games in 2012 should be a more active community. This should be the Mayor’s greatest contribution to public health. Promoting more active life styles for the pleasure that it gives people and the good effects that it has in helping us to control our weight, limiting the expansion of our waistlines and helping to ward off nasty diseases like diabetes, should be part of the Mayor’s public health agenda. For most people, none of this will happen without pleasant places to walk, decent parks to visit and well run leisure centres and swimming pools. The Mayor should work with the London boroughs and the Government to make sure that we prepare for the London Olympics by ensuring that Londoners get the legacy that they will want: by creating the parks, gardens, sports centres and swimming pools that people would like and need. More active life styles and good health go together.
Environment
Waste and Waste Minimisation
We need London to become more aware of the energy that we waste and the waste that we generate. I will encourage the London boroughs to make use of more sustainable waste disposal policies, including energy-from-waste recovery, composting and recycling and to use their procurement weight to support more sustainable goods and services. I will seek to encourage businesses to cut packaging, reduce water consumption and improve the energy-efficiency of buildings through good design. We need smart technology where equipment adjusts the use of energy to the work that is being done. A good example is lifts in buildings with electric motors that take account of the load being moved, rather than using the same amount of electricity regardless of the load. Once waste has been minimised and re-usable materials have been recycled, we should dispose of it in an environmentally friendly way. Where practical I will support the carriage of waste by river. This will need to be under-pinned by greater attention to waste minimisation and “producer responsibility". New housing should incorporate proper waste storage and separation facilities.
Climate Change, Air quality and water leaks
As a supporter of the precautionary principle, it is clear that London must play its part in seeking to minimise the impacts and causes of climate change. This means cutting unnecessary transport emissions, improving domestic energy efficiency and supporting carbon trading to ensure that companies face a clear choice between cutting pollution or paying a higher price for continuing to generate waste. I will support initiatives to improve the quality of London’s air, land and rivers and will encourage higher fines for environmental infringements. I will expect water utilities to demonstrate increased levels of activity in reducing leaks.
Energy
In addition to supporting energy-from-waste schemes, which can deliver local heating, I will want to encourage much greater energy efficiency in homes and businesses. I will support the wider use of photovoltaics and improved insulation.
Derelict stations and land
There is also an opportunity to improve the appearance and attractiveness of many of our shopping parades across London. I will encourage the development of more starter homes above shops. I will hold a competition to encourage the design and construction of a new model of “town square," which combines shops, delivery space, parking, housing and safe play areas in an attractive landscape incorporating trees and green spaces.
In many outer London boroughs the area around mainline railway and underground stations is neglected and unattractive. Too often these spaces attract crime. I will work with the Strategic Rail Authority and others, to develop additional uses for station buildings and derelict land. These may provide a good location for starter business units, retail outlets and some affordable housing. This will bring life back to these areas and improve public safety. I will also work with the SRA and other rail authorities to remove graffiti from stations and railway infrastructure. I will launch a “Mayor’s Award Scheme" for the companies that works most closely with local authorities to clear-up derelict and unattractive land and to restore spaces spoiled by graffiti.
Front Gardens and Tree Avenues
I will lend support to local authorities that seek to minimise the loss of front gardens. The increased loss of green spaces for car parking is reducing the “soak away" areas in front of houses. This can result in increased subsidence as well as environmental degradation and loss of biodiversity. I will encourage the planting of more trees in the approach roads to London, in shopping areas and on derelict open space as part of an “Olympic" greening of the City between 2008 and 2012. Boroughs will be encouraged to plant “Olympic Avenues" of trees to rival the green corridors of roads like the Thames Embankment.
London’s Economy
London dominates the British economy and generates wealth disproportionate to the size of the population that lives and works here. The London economy generates £181 billion and supports 4.4 million jobs. Greater London accounts for 19 per cent of the UK’s GDP and 15 per cent of total employment. This reflects the skills, education and productivity of the people who work in London. Gross value added per job in London is 27 per cent higher than the national average. London and its financial markets has become a magnet for talent and money from all over the world. The financial markets of the City of London have lead the way in creating a truly post-industrial economy for the 21st century. They earn billions of pounds for the UK as a whole and employ tens of thousands of people in highly-paid jobs that are the catalyst for the service industries in London that millions of people depend on for their employment.
It is these international markets that directly and indirectly provide the tax base in London that generates the tax revenue that pays for so many of the public services throughout Britain. London contributes £87 billion or almost 19 per cent of UK Government tax revenues, while only accounting for 12.5 per cent of the population. Public spending per person employed in London is 7 per cent lower than the national average. Without London, Gordon Brown would not be able to tax and spend as he did when he was the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Treasury would not be able to subsidise the rest of the country in the way that it does. It is in Britain’s interest for London to be successful.
Promoting London and London’s Financial Markets to the World
We need a Mayor who understands London’s financial markets and their importance to London’s economy, and who will help to promote London to the international business community. We need a Mayor who will champion London at home and abroad. London is clearly rated as the best city within Europe in which to locate a business whether it is financial or otherwise. But London does not just compete within Europe, hampered as Europe is by high taxes and a straitjacket of regulation. London competes head to head with New York and there is a real chance that London could overtake New York as a financial centre.
We need a Mayor who will champion London’s financial markets. London needs a Mayor who will explain the case for a lightly regulated and taxed economy if it is going to continue to compete for business internationally. London has increased its share of financial market transactions and there has been a striking growth in business services such as law, accountancy, advertising and computing. But we need a Mayor who understands that there is nothing automatic about London remaining home to the world’s financial markets that generate so much of our wealth and jobs. In the 1960s New York looked as if Wall Street enjoyed an unassailable position, but it lost it in a few short years and has never recovered from its mistaken tax and regulatory policies of forty years ago. We need a Mayor who will spell out the recipe for a strong and dynamic economy that competes and creates wealth and jobs: light regulation, low taxes and a flexible jobs market.
London’s Jobs Challenge
While the London economy and its financial markets have been dynamic and successful in recent years, the metropolis faces a serious employment challenge. London’s share of employment is falling. The number of jobs in London has grown, but they have grown slower than in the rest of the country. In 2001 London accounted for over 16½ per cent of the jobs in Great Britain. This has now fallen to less than 15½ per cent. The proportion of Londoners in work is relatively low compared to the rest of the country. Growth in employment in London has been slower than anywhere else in the country, apart from Northern Ireland. Of the 20 local authorities with the lowest rates of employment in the country, 10 are London boroughs. Boroughs in inner and outer London dominate the list of places that would need to have the greatest rate of job growth to ensure that the rate of employment is comparable to the UK average. These boroughs include Newham, Barking and Dagenham, Waltham Forest, Kensington and Chelsea, Islington and Westminster. The problem is not a lack of jobs, rather it is that Londoners do not get local jobs. London tends to have around 1 job per head of the working age population but only around 70 per cent of London residents are in those jobs – the rest are taken up by commuters from outside Greater London. We need to equip Londoners with the skills to get the jobs that are available for them in their city.
Making sure no one is left behind
London needs a Mayor who will work to ensure that all parts of London and all communities in Greater London share in London’s economic dynamism and prosperity. Too many communities that amount to cities in themselves, have failed to share fully in London’s economic prosperity and employment. We need a Mayor who understands how people and communities can find themselves shut out of work through barriers that prevent them from working even when they are surrounded by prosperity and wealth. London needs a Mayor who appreciates how difficult it is for single parents, for young people leaving school with few qualifications, and for people living on isolated estates, to find work that pays or that covers the cost of childcare. We need a Mayor with practical ideas about how to help, and who understands the challenges of education and training. Over the last eight year, as London has got richer, these problems have got worse. London needs a Mayor determined to tackle them. We need to equip people with the skills that are in demand so that people are trained for new jobs that become available.
Working together for London
We need a Mayor who will work with everyone to make London a better city.
We need a Mayor who brings everyone involved in governing London together, not someone who is merely a spanner in the works.
We need a Mayor who will work with the London boroughs rather than against them.
We need a Mayor who will bring the leaders of the London boroughs together to consult them either formally in regular London summits, or as an advisory senate; and who will see how the Greater London Authority can work to together with the boroughs in the interests of the whole of the metropolis.
We need a Mayor who can champion London’s financial markets, who understands London’s economy and who will work with the City to present London to the world.
We need a Mayor who concentrates on the strategic role given to the Mayor and the Greater London Authority; not a City Hall where the Mayor tries to interfere with the boroughs and take powers away from them.
Mayor who works for London
We need a Mayor who will champion London and its financial markets on the world stage and a Mayor who understands the basis for the success of London’s financial services industry.
We need a Mayor that concentrates on the job of sorting out London’s problems and challenges.
The Mayor should not get distracted into wider national and international political debates that are remote from London’s problems. We need a Mayor who will concentrate on how we get more work for Londoners, detect more crimes in London, get more police on the beat, achieve better value for money from the Tube modernisation and who ensures a more affordable council tax for Londoners.
A Mayor for Greater London
We need a Mayor with policies that work for the whole of Greater London, not a Mayor who spends money and concentrates on the specific challenges of inner London and is blind to the needs of the outer London boroughs.
Greater London has communities that could almost be cities themselves like Harrow, Uxbridge and Croydon. These are vital and dynamic centres where people come to work, shop and play. We need a Mayor who will work to support them.
We need buses not just in central London, but also on orbital routes in outer London to serve communities that should have a distinct economic vitality of their own. We need to make better use of suburban stations. In recent years some of these distinct and important communities have lost out in relation to London’s prosperity and have not developed to their full potential. Moreover, some of these communities have lost out in terms of London’s public spending and public sector investment.
London needs a fresh start and fresh face.
London is a great city and is home to world-class financial markets; to museums and galleries; to universities and scientific research institutions that are the envy of the world. Londoners need a new Mayor who will match these world-class institutions with world-class public services that are professionally and competently managed. Londoners want a safe city where they can travel around securely and with certainty. They want an Underground and a bus service that work reliably, efficiently and safely, offering the passenger a comfortable and convenient service. And Londoners want value for money from the billions of pounds that are spent in the Mayor’s budgets each year. They want a Mayor who will cut out the waste, confusion and duplication in the GLA budgets. As Mayor, I will tackle crime, reform London’s public services and make certain that Londoner’s get value for money from every pound that taxpayers spend in the metropolis.
Warwick Lightfoot
September 2007