Brent Central Labour nominate 'safe' candidates for London Mayor

Brent Central Constituency Labour Party has nominated Sadiq Khan and Diane Abbott as Labour candidates for the London Mayoral elections. There has to be both a male and female nomination.

The nomination of Sadiq Khan is no surprise as senior Labour councillors have been tweeting in his support for some time and he was active in Brent during the General Election campaign.

However his nomination has not been universally welcome. Cllr Sam Stopp, who was recently elected to Brent Scrutiny Committee, supported  David Lammy denouncing the current front runners as 'safe choices' and 'establishment' candidates.

He argues that Lammy has a wider reach outside the Labour camp.

Stopp said on Twitter that he suspects that there has been an element of 'machine politics' in Labour's Mayoral selection process and refers to a recent Comment is Free article by Rafael Behr LINK

Behr wrote about the leadership election where MPs have publicly endorsed candidates but it could be equally true of the Mayoral campaign where senior Labour councillors endorse candidates:

  Meanwhile the system by which Labour MPs publicly nominate candidates for the leadership and deputy leadership militates in favour of the status quo. Endorsements are traded for preferment in future shadow cabinet appointments or favour in elections to select committees. Hope of ascent up the parliamentary pecking order – or fear of a punitive pecking by a rival faction – often comes before appraisal of the arguments.

Of course this isn't limited to Labour and although the Greens have few preferments to offer it is something to be aware of in our selection process for London Mayor and GLA.

Meanwhile David Lammy appears to have got into a bit of a spat with Rev Paul Nicholson, a leading poverty campaigner. LINK

It will be interesting to see who is nominated by Hampstead & Kilburn and Brent North CLPs.

Brent Council calls for modification of Mayoral Development Corporation' for Park Royal/Old Oak while Hammersmith & Fulham opposes in principle

Brent's Cabinet which meets tomorrow afternoon, will be considering its response to the proposed Mayoral Development Corporation (MDC) that would take control of the regeneration of Old Oak Common and Park Royal. It would cover parts of Brent, Hammersmith and Fulham and Ealing.

Stephen Cowan, leader of  Hammersmith and Fulham Council, came out strongly against it in July, calling it a 'land grab'.

This council objects to an MDC at Old Oak and Park Royal. We are concerned about the Mayor of London’s record on delivering truly affordable homes for Londoners and do not believe he should be entrusted with sole responsibility on a scheme of this importance.

We are committed to changing housing policies so that we build homes for residents rather than investment properties for overseas speculators and look forward to working with Ealing and Brent councils to do that. There is no good business case for the Mayor to step in.

In fact, the move in government over the years has been to devolve more powers to local communities not take them away. The Mayor’s proposed organisation is a throwback to decades long gone, it would be undemocratic and unnecessarily takes away powers from local residents and local businesses and essentially hands them over to developers and unelected bureaucrats.

There is little information on Ealing Council's  response but Brent Council LINK does not follow Hammersmith and Fulham in opposing the MDC in principle:

To support delivery on the scale required there is no doubt a delivery body  with a strong regeneration focus is required. Without such a body there is a real risk that the opportunity HS2 and the Old Oak interchange presents for Brent will be missed. Arguably an MDC gives Brent greater influence over the proposals that will come forward at Old Oak as the Council will have representation on the decision making bodies.

The report goes on to seek some changes in the MDC brief..

In fact, when the Ealing Officer's report LINK sets out their demands if the MDC goes ahead despite their opposition, there is little difference between the two Councils.  Both seek changes in the borders of the MDC zone.  Both seek greater representation on the MDC and quote the Localism Act in their support. Both also seek assurances on the availability of genuinely affordable housing. Brent is also concerned about the CIL (Community Infrastructure Levy).

Countering the MDC proposal Hammermsith and Fulham call for a Joint Area Action Plan:

The Council has also discussed the potential for a joint Area Action Plan that would include land from LBs of Ealing and Brent as well as LBHF. Officers from the three Boroughs have been working well together on this project for a considerable period of time meeting weekly with the GLA and TfL as a JointProject Team and reporting up to a Project Strategy Board. LBHF has resourced the project with key staff who have led on and significantly progressed the project. This process could continue (subject to discussion and agreement with LBs of Ealing and Brent) and a cross borough Area Action Plan could be progressed by the three boroughs without the considerable expense and administration involved insetting up an MDC.

This is not mentioned as far as I can see in the Brent report - Brent offers no alternative, just a modification of the MDC. It is surprising that in dealing with a Tory mayor that three Labour boroughs have not cooperated more on their response.

Brent Officers call for the following local benefits:

Controversial issues ahead for Brent Cabinet on September 15th

Brent Council's Forward Plan gives clues to what is coming up at future Cabinet meetings although explanation is minimal. Full details of reports and agenda items are only available to the public one week before the meeting.

With the lack of an effective opposition and poor scrutiny arrangements (and doesn't the Care Quality Commission report on the NW London Hospitals NHS Trust make the case for a powerful separate Health Scrutiny Committee) early notice becomes more important, although actvists may have to speculate about what indiviual items really mean.

Here are the reports/proposals coming up for discussion at the September 15th Cabinet with my comments in italics. Note how much background information is withheld from the public on various items.

The Cabinet now alternates day time and evening meetings. This meeting will be at 2pm.

Developing a new Borough Plan for Brent 2015-2019

To approve the process and timetable for agreeing the key priorities for Brent over the next five years and the plan to achieving them. (This will be in the context of continuing major cuts to LA budgets)

Consultation on the proposed Mayoral Development Corporation for Old Oak and Park Royal

To approve the response to the GLA consultation on the proposed Mayoral Development Corporation for Old Oak and Park Royal. (This also affects Ealing and Hammersmith and Fulham boroughs and it means Boris Johnson will takes planning powers away from those boroughs.Hammersmith and Fulham Council have objected LINK. Will Brent?)

Performance and Finance Review Q1

To confirm the first quarter’s performance and spending in 2014/15.

Mobile Workforce Software Procurement

To agree to procurement of a Mobile Workforce Software Solution through competitive tender that can be used by any field officer working in areas such as Social Services, Building Control, Planning, Environmental Health etc. to carry out their key tasks interacting with their line of business systems when offsite using mobile devices such as tablets.

These are the following key benefits:

* Customer service improvements and actions can be carried out immediately.

* Staff and efficiency savings as staff can spend more time in the field and will not need to travel to the office before or after their appointments.

* Potential cost reductions data will not need to be re-keyed when staff come back to the office

Initial communications provision at the new Civic Centre was poor, will this be an improvment. Interesting also that this aims to reduce use of the £100m Civic Centre by staff. The Council is already proposing to lease two floors to Air France, is this intended to release more space?

Update on Public Health Contracts

To note the progress on the procurements of the public health services and to approve the selection criteria and timetable for the procurements

School Expansion

To agree procurements and statutory consultations to take forward specific school expansion proposals.

An appendix to this report will be not for publication as it contains the following categories of exempt information specified in the Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act, namely: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information); and, information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations, in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the authority.

Contracts for building works associated with school expansion are lucrative but have not always delivered on time or of best quality with sub-contracting sometimes an issue.

Brent Education Commission Review

To consider the action plan based on the recommendations of the Brent Education Commission review.

The Review has major implications for the development of education in Brent LINK and includes some controversial proposals including encouraging free schools to set up in Brent to provide extra places (the current restriiction on LAs building new schools coudl be lifted by a new government in 2015) and the scaling down of Brent's school Improvement service. Certainly any Action plan needs to be subject to widespread discussion and consultation.

I would argue that Education, or Children and Families, due to the complex issues involved also needs its own Scrutiny Committee.

Brent Local Implementation Plan (LIP) submission for 2015/16 - 2017/18

To endorse the 2015/16 LIP submission to be submitted to Transport for London

To delegate authority to Operational Director, Neighbourhoods to proceed with schemes subject to results of consultation and to deliver the programme within overall funding allocation.

(Signficant expenditure/savings > 30% of budget for the function in question)

Domestic Violence Advocacy, family support and MARAC coordination services

To award the contract for the provision of domestic violence advocacy, family support and MARAC coordination services for a period of two years from 1 November 2014 to 31 Oct 2016, with the option to extend for further one year.

Housing Zones

To approve the submission of an application to the GLA to establish a housing zone and its location in the borough to accelerate housing supply.

This relates to a government initiative to release brownfield sites for housing. The Mayor of London has invited bids for £400m funding to set up 20 housing zones in the capital.

South Kilburn Regeneration Programme

To note the progress on the South Kilburn regeneration programme and to approve the progress the procurement (sic) of a developer partner for the Gloucester House and Durham Court redevelopment site.

Appendices to this report will be not for publication as it contains the following categories of exempt information specified in the Schedule 12 of the Local Government Act, namely: information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).

South Kilburn residents have not been happy with the regeneration so far LINK

Barnet Council gives go ahead for Brent Cross redevelopment

Regular readers will know that the Brent Cross development has been subject to much debate, not least because of the increase in car traffic involved in the expansion of retail and the associated loss of green space. See Coalition for a Sustainable Brent Cross Development  LINK

This is a Press Release from Barnet Council: 

Barnet Council has today confirmed planning permission for a revamped Brent Cross Cricklewood shopping centre as part of the wider Brent Cross Cricklewood redevelopment. 

The confirmation comes today following the signing of final commercial agreements between Barnet Council, developers Hammerson and Standard Life.

The overall development of both north and south sides of the A406 will create more than 27,000 jobs and 7,500 homes and double the size of the shopping centre.

The Section 106 planning agreement is one of the largest in British history and will see a £250m investment in roads, public transport and pedestrian and cycle links as well as three new parks.

It will also see investment in three new schools and other community facilities as well as a £5.6m major improvements to Clitterhouse Playing Fields.

Leader of the Council, Councillor Richard Cornelius said:

It is very difficult to overstate the importance of this redevelopment to Barnet. The council is committed to playing an active role in the development of the south side of the site to get the best financial deal for the taxpayer and to play our part in creating a thriving London neighbourhood.

We are particularly excited by the opportunities presented by Brent Cross overground station which will give a 12 minute fast link into Kings Cross. We are working very closely with the Treasury and the Mayor’s Office to make this happen.

PARK ROYAL: Hammersmith & Fulham object to London Mayor usurping planning powers while Brent remains silent

This Guest Blog from Harlesden Blogspot highlights a neighbouring borough's  reaction to the London Mayor's proposal to take planning powers from Brent, Ealing and Hammersmith & Fulham in order to develop the Old Oak Common and Park Royal site. So far Brent Council has been silent on the issue, merely advertising the consultation, which closes on September 24th, on its website LINK

The issue will be discussed at the Harlesden Brent Connects meeting on July 8th at Tavistock Hall, off the High Street AGENDA

A proposal to take local planning powers away on one of the capital’s biggest housing projects are ‘an anti-democratic land grab’ which gives the potential for the Mayor to allow the building of properties for overseas speculators rather than homes Londoners can afford, according to Hammersmith & Fulham (H&F) Council.

The Mayor of London launched a consultation on plans to create a Mayoral Development Corporation (MDC) around Old Oak Common and Park Royal which is the area where the new High Speed 2 (HS2) hub station is expected to be built.

The MDC would assume planning powers within its borders, which span large parts of the north of H&F and parts of Brent and Ealing. H&F’s new administration objects to this and has raised concerns that this is nothing more than a land-grab designed to make life easier for the developers – at the cost of local people.

Another regeneration scheme, another extension of Mayoral powers and another kick in the face for local democracy

Guest blog by Nic Lane on behalf of Brent Housing Action LINK and the Radical Housing Network LINK

Last week the members of Brent’s Citizen Panel were sent the following email:

“The Mayor of London Boris Johnson has recently outlined proposals to transform Old Oak and Park Royal into a thriving new district with up to 24,000 new homes and more than 55,000 jobs.

As part of this long term plan, the Mayor intends to create a new Mayoral Development Corporation (MDC) to unlock the enormous regeneration potential of this 950 hectares of industrial land at Old Oak Common and Park Royal in West London.

Please click here to find out more and to take part in the online consultation on Old Oak - Mayor's Development Corporation.

The consultation will run until Wednesday, 24 September 2014.”  

Residents are strongly urged to read the documentation that the link leads to; this is another classic example of BoJo's "monolith-o-maniacal" desire to stamp his personality all over London with a series of regeneration schemes and so-called iconic buildings in his run up to become PM (or possibly another Caesar given his latinate leanings).

It is only a couple of months ago that BoJo was publicly reprimanded in the London Assembly LINK for overusing his ability to veto the wishes of local government planning departments - even when these pet projects are in direct contravention of his own "London Plan" LINK Tulip Siddiq, Labour’s prospective 2015 parliamentary candidate for Hampstead and Kilburn, revealed at last Wednesday’s Swiss Cottage Action Group this looks very likely to happen again in the case of the development at 100 Avenue Road LINK due to the height of the proposed building.

The formation of the proposed Mayoral Development Corporation will create a nasty precedent which will give him further legal powers to ignore the wishes of any local democratic organisations, be they Councils or residents groups. This is made clear in the documentation:

“Within Old Oak and Park Royal, the Mayor intends for the new Corporation to take on powers relating to infrastructure, regeneration, land acquisitions including Compulsory Purchase Orders, adopting streets, and business and financial support. In addition, the Corporation would also take over planning powers from the London boroughs of Brent, Ealing and Hammersmith & Fulham. The Corporation would lead on preparing the local plans and determining large planning applications submitted within this area.” LINK

Even worse, this plan creates a noxious local parallel to the hugely under-reported Infrastructure Bill that is currently before Parliament. This bill - which is comparable to the Enclosure Acts in its land grabbing intent - allows for 90% of local authority "brownfield sites" to be parcelled out and sold on by the Homes and Communities Agency without reference to any other planning agency decisions or the wishes of the local residents. More information about this Bill can be found here LINK and here LINK 

It's also worth noting that the potency of the claim that the development will create "24,000 homes and 55,000 jobs" currently has all the strength of an homoeopathic remedy; there is no trace evidence of the type of homes or jobs the scheme will create. It's all a construct of BoJo's feverish imagination and desire to attract foreign investment to the Capital LINK a sales pitch for a quack panacea for London's ills. This is the description of how Old Oak will be transformed:

“... the Government has announced proposals for a new High Speed 2 (HS2) and Crossrail station at Old Oak by 2026, potentially making it one of the best connected railway stations in the UK. This could give rise to significant potential for economic development, jobs growth and new homes. The Mayor of London also sees this as an opportunity  to regenerate the wider area.

Based around the new HS2 and Crossrail station at Old Oak, the Mayor, Transport for London (TfL), plus the London Boroughs of Hammersmith & Fulham, Brent and Ealing, have been considering the potential for regenerating the area and are seeking views on a 30-year Vision for Old Oak. This could transform the area with up to 90,000 jobs and up to 19,000 new homes, schools, open spaces, shops and leisure facilities.” LINK

As this last quote shows, the advocates of this plan can't even offer up a coherent concrete argument. It's all maybes and made-up figures and Machiavellian manipulations.

Please, please, please - complete the consultation and show your opposition to the creeping centralisation of power which is placing the wishes of the financiers and developers over the needs of local residents.

Crumbs for Londoners - Darren Johnson on the Mayor's housing policy

The Mayor expects 80% of new housing to be in these 33 regeneration areas

 Darren Johnson, the Green Assembly Member,  has published a thoroughly researched report on the London Mayor's approach to the housing crisis and the construction of  luxury blocks, such as those at Willesden Green Library, which Boris Johnson  supports as part of the solution.  The full report is available HERE

The Willesden Green apartments are being advertised in Singapore with the selling point that they have no affordable housing or key workers on site. Yesterday it was revealed that flats in Stratford are being adverised in a similar way.

Darren Johnson writes:

It is much easier for the big developers behind these projects to get the finance from banks if they can sell lots of housing off-plan (before it is built). Investor landlords are quite happy to buy off-plan and have little difficulty in securing the cash or mortgage.By putting the money in up front they have, in the Mayor’s words,“helped bring forward housing development”. The Mayor estimates that one third of all buyers of new homes are from overseas, and that two thirds of all new homes are sold to investors

.

Whether it is a Londoner looking for a buy-to-let investment,a pension fund investing in new private rented housing,or an overseas investor exploiting the exchange rates, the Mayor is a champion of anything that gets housing built.

After looking at a series of case studies and examination of the evidence Johnson concludes:

National government policy has put local councillors, planning officers and residents in a difficult spot. They are constrained by a free market dogma that says we just need developers to build more homes, and that ignores the potential for other approaches.


The law of supply and demand works with things we consume. If the price of TVs is high, produce more TVs to meet demand and prices will fall. But private developers are very unlikely to meet the demand for housing. If the supply of TVs doesn’t increase and prices stay high then demand should fall off.


But when house prices rise people see an opportunity to make money so demand can keep rising, especially if investors from around the world join the feast.


The Government is encouraging buy-to-let mortgages with tax breaks; helping people take out unaffordable mortgages with Help to Buy; encouraging overseas investors to buy new homes off plan.


The Mayor supports these policies because he says they increase supply, but of course they are also increasing demand.In fact, they are probably more successful at increasing demand than they are at increasing supply, so they are actually making the problem worse.


Councils and residents can’t do very much about this.


But the Mayor of London is in a unique position to advocate bold changes to housing policy. He has recently argued that stamp duty revenue in London should be devolved to City Hall, giving him a large budget for affordable housing.


He could go further and call for a housing policy that:


1. constrains demand by putting controls or extra taxes on overseas investors and second home owners, or by putting a tax on all land values to dampen speculation and stop developers sitting on large, unused land banks
2. gives councils, housing associations and co-operatives the money and powers to build affordable homes that stay affordable forever whatever the market is doing, instead of expecting the private market to build them
3. puts ordinary people in a better position to weather the crisis while it is tackled, for example with continental-style stabilising rent controls and protections for private tenants, ideas backed by the majority of the Assembly in its own reviews of housing and its majority support for the Let Down campaign

Comments can be sent to: darren.johnson@london.gov.uk or the researcher tom.chance@london.gov.uk

Boris Johnson gives Barnet Council the go-ahead for destruction of Welsh Harp

The Mayor of London, Boris Johnson has ignored the concerns of local residents regarding Barnet Council’s West Hendon Planning Application, despite strong objections. The development launched by Barrett Homes is set to build 2000 new dwelling units, including four large tower blocks next door to Welsh Harp, one of London’s biggest and most significant nature reserves. Residents and campaigners are concerned that this development will destroy permanently the natural landscape which contains a wildfowl reserve and is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

A cross party joint letter from Brent and Barnet campaigners was issued to the Mayor detailing their concerns regarding the planning application asking him to reject the application. 

The Mayor has decided that he is content to let Barnet Council decide the application, subject to any action the Secretary of State may take,  and does not want to exercise his right to refuse the application or take over as the planning authority.

Local London Assembly Navin Shah AM said:

‘’This is an outrageous decision by the Mayor of London which will obliterate the beautiful landscape, tranquility and ecological values of a site which should be protected for its special scientific interest. The Mayor has ignored the policies of his own London Plan and given Barnet Council the green light to vandalise this site of  great value.

‘’340 people have written to the Mayor asking him to refuse this application. Furthermore, there has also been a submission of two petitions that have been signed by 987 people. It is disgraceful that the Mayor has yet again refused to listen to local communities in Brent and Barnet. People will never forgive him for signing off the destruction of this site’’.  

 

The human cost of out-sourcing: Justice for the 33

Some of the 33 sacked workers outside Wembley Central today

A demonstration was held today outside Wembley Central station for 33 agency workers employed by Railpeople who were given notice of the termination of their contracts just before Christmas. The agency deployed them in the Wembley Central Group on various duties for London Underground.  The workers had achieved  7 100% consecutive Customer Service marks during the Olympics and now their Olympic 'legacy' is loss of their jobs.

They were turned down for alternative permanent jobs with London Underground (doing the same kind of thing they were doing on short-term, zero hours, no pension contracts). Instead they employed people who hadn't doen the jobs before.  HT apparently told them that although they were good enough to do the jobs as agency staff they weren't good enough to work directly for London Underground.

When London Underground took control of the stations north of Queens Park in 2008 that the casualisation of the job, particularly the use of agency workers, lead to a dispute as a result of which LU assured the RMT that the use of agency staff would be temporary, lasting a maximum of six months. Some of the workers have been with Trainpeople agency for five years!

The RMT has taken up their case and are demanding that all LU trained station staff working for Trainpeople agency should be transferred over to LU without having to apply for the job,

Bob Crow of the RMT made an impassioned speech putting the sackings in the context of privatisation and austerity, Navin Shah AM  cited equality (all the 33 are members of ethnic minorities) as the big issue and promised to take the case up with London Underground, TfL and the Major, and Councillor Nana Asante from Harrow pledged her support.

However the speech that stayed with me was from one of the workers who spoke movingly about the real impact on her and the sense of bewilderment she felt.

Boris Johnson fails to answer key questions on his free school policy

Following Boris Johnson's announcement that he wanted to encourage more free schools in London and find GLA surplus property for them, Darren Johnson Green Assembly Member put a number of questions to him in order to delve deeper into his policy which could threaten equality of access for children with disabilities and special educational needs as well as reduce public accountability of schools.

The answers indicate that in fact there is no depth to the policy and that it has not been thought through. Londoners deserve more than 'off the top of the head' thinking when it comes to educating our chidlren. Today's league tables for regions and local authorities show London local authoirty secondary schools are rated higher by Ofsted than the England average.

Here are the questions which Boris Johnson apparently found too hard to answer:

Accountability of Free Schools

Question No: 3469 / 2012

Darren Johnson

How will you ensure that free schools you support, financially, with sites or otherwise, are democratically accountable to the local community as well as to the Secretary of State for Education?

Written response from the Mayor

Policy on free schools is set nationally. Please contact the Department for Education for information about free schools and accountability. More information about free schools is available at http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools.

 

*

Free School policies (1)

Question No: 3470 / 2012

Darren Johnson

How will you ensure that there is fair access to free schools for pupils with special education needs, disabilities or on the free school meals register?

Written response from the Mayor

Policy on free schools is set nationally. Please contact the Department for Education for information about free schools and Special Educational Needs, disabilities, and Free School Meals. More information about free schools is available at http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools.

 

Free School policies (2)

Question No: 3471 / 2012

Darren Johnson

How will you ensure that all free schools you support, financially, with sites or otherwise, commit to a close working relationship with the local authority in order to maintain an appropriate focus on borough-wide priorities, including local authority nomination of a member of the governing body and a commitment to sharing performance information?

Written response from the Mayor

Policy on free schools is set nationally. Please contact the Department for Education for information about free schools and their relationship with local authorities. More information about free schools is available at http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools.

 

Free School policies (3)

Question No: 3472 / 2012

Darren Johnson

How will you ensure that all free schools you support, financially, with sites or otherwise, commit to appropriate staffing arrangements to ensure high quality teaching and learning from qualified staff and good employment practices, including in relation to support and contracted staff?

Written response from the Mayor

Policy on free schools is set nationally. Please contact the Department for Education for information about free schools and staffing. More information about free schools is available at http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools.

 

Free School policies (4)

Question No: 3473 / 2012

Darren Johnson

How will you ensure that all free schools you support, financially, with sites or otherwise, commit to community access and use of facilities through agreed extended opening and lettings policies?

Written response from the Mayor

Policy on free schools is set nationally. Please contact the Department for Education for information about free schools and community access. More information about free schools is available at http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools.

 

Free School policies (5)

Question No: 3474 / 2012

Darren Johnson

Will you rule out financial support and the provision of GLA group owned sites for free schools that teach creationism as scientific fact?

Written response from the Mayor

The Department for Education has made very clear that it will not grant approval to any free school application that plans to teach creationism as scientific fact.

 

Building new community schools

Question No: 3467 / 2012

Darren Johnson

Will you press the Government to allow London boroughs to build new community schools in areas where there is a shortage of school places?

Written response from the Mayor

London is facing a severe shortfall of school places and I am grateful that the Government has doubled its funding for basic need addressing the shortage left by the previous Government. I will continue to make the case for London to the Treasury as I have previously successfully done when making joint representations with London Councils. Government funding for new schools, including free schools, presumes that they will be academies. I also want to encourage a new generation of free schools in our capital, to help address the shortage of school places and give parents more genuine choice.

 

Building schools where they are most needed

Question No: 3468 / 2012

Darren Johnson

What steps are you taking to ensure that public funding for new schools is directed towards areas of London where there is the largest anticipated shortfall in school places?

Written response from the Mayor

The GLA currently runs a pan London school roll projections service for boroughs. I will explore how we can expand this to cover all boroughs, and how we can work more effectively to develop an improved, strategic picture of school places in the capital. I will also support the creation of new free schools where there is strong parental demand though not necessarily a shortage of places.