London in Tier 3 from Wednesday - Sadiq Khan's statement

 

Statement from the Mayor of London on the capital moving into Tier 3

14 December 2020

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said:

 

“The Government has decided to move London into Tier 3 from one minute past midnight on Wednesday morning. This is incredibly disappointing for our businesses who have suffered so much already this year. But it’s clear that the virus is accelerating in the wrong direction once again across London and the lives of Londoners are at risk. It would be such a tragedy to lose even more people to this disease when the vaccine is now being rolled out across our city.

 

“We know from bitter experience that when cases start to rise quickly, it’s much better to act early, rather than too late.  This is how we can avoid even tougher restrictions, for longer, further down the road.

 

“The worst thing for London’s businesses and our economy would be yet another full lockdown in the new year.  That’s why I urge Londoners to follow the Tier 3 rules that the Government is putting in place very closely so that we can drive down infection rates as much as possible.

 

“This means hospitality settings, such as bars, pubs, cafes and restaurants are required by the Government to close except for takeaway, delivery and click and collect services. You must continue not to meet other households indoors and to keep to the rule of six while outside.

 

“I don’t want London to be in Tier 3 for a day longer than necessary.  I am hugely concerned about the negative impact that the additional restrictions will have on jobs and many businesses that are already struggling to stay afloat.

 

“We now urgently need much more government support for the sectors of our economy that are being hit the hardest, including hospitality, culture, and leisure. It is crucial that Ministers urgently put in place a compensation scheme for all lost income, based on last year’s returns, for any businesses affected by the further restrictions during this crucial festive period.  The Government must also cover the full cost of Statutory Sick Pay for workers who have to self-isolate, and make wearing face coverings mandatory in busy outdoor public spaces.

 

“We have known from the outset of this pandemic that increased testing will be vital to getting the spread of the virus under control. That is why I have called on the Government to extend regular asymptomatic testing to all those unable to work from home and to London’s students and staff at secondary schools, sixth-form colleges and FE colleges.

 

“It is essential that the Government ramps up testing in schools and colleges immediately as this is where the virus is spreading most. If this does not happen, Tier 3 will not only cause huge damage to our hospitality and cultural industries, but the virus will just continue to spread over Christmas at a time when families may well be meeting up and our NHS is under pressure.

 

“Given the significant increase in infections among 10 to 19-year-olds – Government should consider asking secondary schools and colleges which don’t yet have testing facilities to close early and to reopen a bit later in January to allow time for weekly testing to be put in place. 

 

“The vaccine provides some light at the end of the tunnel, so let’s not fall at what could be the last hurdle. So I’d encourage all Londoners to adhere to the new Government rules so that we can save as many live

Sadiq Khan agrees 6 month deal on TfL funding - scrapping of Under-18s and Over-60s free travel 'defeated' or just delayed?

 From the London Mayor Sadiq Khan's Office

The Mayor of London has today reached an eleventh-hour agreement with the Government on a funding deal to keep tube, bus and other TfL services in the capital running until March 2021.

Sadiq Khan said the deal was "not ideal” but added: "We fought hard against this Government which is so determined to punish our city for doing the right thing to tackle Covid-19. The only reason TfL needs government support is because its fares income has almost dried up since March.”

The Mayor has succeeded in killing off the very worst Government proposals, which were confirmed in writing by the Transport Secretary during the negotiations. The Mayor had rejected the extension of the £15 daily Congestion Charge to the North and South circular roads as ministers had wanted – in a proposal which would have hit four million more Londoners hard. The Government has now backed down from this condition.

The Government also wanted to scrap free travel for under-18s and over-60s. These proposals have also been successfully defeated. The Government also wanted TfL fares to rise by more than the previously agreed RPI+1 per cent This has also been successfully fought off.

The deal makes around £1.8 billion of Government grant and borrowing available on current projections to TfL in the second half of this financial year. Transport for London will itself make up through cost savings the £160million gap the deal leaves from the nearly £2 billion the organisation projects it will need to run the tube, bus & other TfL services for the remainder of this financial year.

As part of the deal, London will also have to raise extra money in future years. Decisions about how this additional funding will be raised are yet to be made by the Mayor, but some of the options that he and the government have agreed to be looked at include a modest increase in council tax, pending the appropriate consultation, as well as keeping in place the temporary changes to the central London Congestion Charge that were introduced in June 2020, subject to consultation.

Despite providing the private rail operating companies with 18 months of funding with no conditions attached, the Government has refused to give TfL more than a six-month deal and even this has come with conditions. This means another financial agreement will have to be negotiated just before next year’s mayoral election, a far from ideal time to negotiate a fair long-term deal for London.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan said:

“These negotiations with Government have been an appalling and totally unnecessary distraction at a time when every ounce of attention should have been focused on trying to slow the spread of Covid-19 and protecting jobs.

“The pandemic has had the same impact on the finances of the privatised rail companies as it has had on TfL and the Government immediately bailed them out for 18 months with no strings attached. There is simply no reason why the same easy solution could not have been applied to London, which would have allowed us all to focus on the issues that matter most to Londoners, which are tackling the virus and protecting jobs.

“I am pleased that we have succeeded in killing off the very worst Government proposals.

"These proposals from the Government would have hammered Londoners by massively expanding the congestion charge zone, scrapping free travel for older and younger Londoners and increasing TfL fares by more than RPI+1. I am determined that none of this will now happen.

"This is not a perfect deal, but we fought hard to get to the best possible place. The only reason TfL needs Government support is because almost all our fares income has dried up since March as Londoners have done the right thing.”

From London Green Party

Green Party Assembly Member and Mayoral Candidate,  Sian Berry said: 

"A six month agreement leaves all the same arguments to flare up again ahead of the Mayor and Assembly elections when we needed long-term security.

"I am sick of Londoners being used as a political football by the Government. It's clear is so many recent events that they are only interested in winning power. not governing well and the uncertainty this leaves Londoners facing is not in the city's best interests.

And it is completely unfair to make a council tax rise and fare increase cover travelcards for older and young Londoners. If we had a fair, smart road charging system in the works for a longer term deal, these extra charges for all Londoners would not be necessary."

 

Sadiq Khan calls for new restrictions to be imposed early, rather than full lockdown when it's too late

 Following on from the previous two post this is a statement made by London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, today:

“The Prime Minister has said that we are now seeing the start of a second wave of COVID-19 across the UK. Londoners should also know that I am extremely concerned by the latest evidence I’ve seen today from public health experts about the accelerating speed at which COVID-19 is now spreading here in London. This is made worse by the uncertainty caused by the lack of testing capacity in the capital.

“This afternoon I held an emergency meeting with London council leaders, the Government and Public Health England to discuss the next steps. It is increasingly likely that, in London, additional measures will soon be required to slow the spread of the virus. We will be considering some of the measures which have already been imposed in other parts of the UK. I am of the firm view that we should not wait, as happened six months ago, for this virus to again spiral out of control before taking action. The best thing for both public health and the economy is new restrictions imposed early, rather than a full lockdown when it’s too late - but the government must urgently ensure there is a fully functioning testing system.

“I strongly urge all Londoners to be as cautious as possible over this weekend. Please think very carefully about your actions - strictly follow social distancing rules, regularly wash your hands and wear a face covering to help reduce the spread of the virus.”

Toxic Tunnel set to cost Londoners £2bn, nearly three times original cost undermining aspirations to build back better

The Mayor of London has committed Londoners to paying £65 million a year for a quarter of a century for the Silvertown Road Tunnel, Caroline Russell AM revealed today raising doubts over the commitment to 'build back better' as a result of the lessons learned during the Covid19 shutdown.

 

Last year, Transport for London (TfL) signed a contract with Riverlinx which committed them to the Silvertown Road Tunnel project, but it was only in March after months of requests being stonewalled that the Mayor published the contract in highly redacted form. The entire document on ‘Payment Mechanism’ simply consisted of a contents table and a note stating the details were ‘excluded commercially sensitive information’.

 

A small, discreet note in TfL’s recently published accounts reveals, along with further commentary from TfL auditors Ernst and Young, a failure by the Mayor to be straight with Londoners on the cost of this polluting motorway tunnel.

 

The £65m annual cost included in TfL’s accounts indicates that the total cost from 2025 to 2050 could be £1.6bn before including inflation, which even at 1.6 per cent RPI (the current figure for July) would lead to a total payment by TfL of £2 billion by 2050.

 

Caroline Russell said:

The Mayor has not been straight with Londoners. Last year he told us Silvertown Road Tunnel would cost £1 billion, in March it was £1.2 billion, and now we finally see what TfL will actually pay and it’s heading for £2 billion. This is outrageous.

I have stood alongside many communities in opposing this tunnel which would run a belching, polluting road through the heart of some of London’s most deprived areas. 

 

The real financial cost has been hidden to avoid further opposition from the public and local politicians.
 

When my predecessor on the Assembly first started opposing this scheme in 2012 Transport for London described the cost as being about £600 million, we are stratospheres above that now and TfL will be saddled paying for this, even in our uncertain future.

 

The Mayor should have been clear about this cost implication for TfL from the start. As things stand, he should do the decent thing and cancel this polluting motorway tunnel now.

Brent Cyclists lobby Council on Post-Covid-19 local transport

The Brent Cycling Campaign has published an open letter to Brent Council officials and councillors setting out proposals for 'A Shared Future' for local transport in the post-Covid-19 era.

The proposals would complement the 'London Streetspace' programme announced by Sadiq Khan and TfL LINK .

This is a tremendous opportunity to build on the gains we have all noticed in terms of air quality and other factors that have made our area more 'liveable' as a pleasant by-product of the current cruel crisis.

The full letter is below. Click on bottom right hand corner for full page version.

Sadiq Khan and TfL announce post-lockdown 'London Streetspace' programme

From the London Mayor's Office

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, and TfL have today unveiled their ‘London Streetspace’ programme which will rapidly transform London’s streets to accommodate a possible ten-fold increase in cycling and five-fold increase in walking when lockdown restrictions are eased.

With London’s public transport capacity potentially running at a fifth of pre-crisis levels, millions of journeys a day will need to be made by other means. If people switch only a fraction of these journeys to cars, London risks grinding to a halt, air quality will worsen, and road danger will increase.

To prevent this happening, TfL will rapidly repurpose London’s streets to serve this unprecedented demand for walking and cycling in a major new strategic shift.

Early modelling by TfL has revealed there could be more than a 10-fold increase in kilometres cycled, and up to five times the amount of walking, compared to pre-COVID levels, if demand returns.

TfL, working with London’s boroughs will make changes - unparalleled in a city London’s size – to focus on three key areas:

• The rapid construction of a strategic cycling network, using temporary materials, including new routes aimed at reducing crowding on Underground and train lines, and on busy bus corridors.
• A complete transformation of local town centres to enable local journeys to be safely walked and cycled where possible. Wider footways on high streets will facilitate a local economic recovery, with people having space to queue for shops as well as enough space for others to safely walk past while socially distancing.
• Reducing traffic on residential streets, creating low-traffic neighbourhoods right across London to enable more people to walk and cycle as part of their daily routine, as has happened during lockdown.

Euston Road is one of the first main thoroughfares to benefit from temporary cycle lanes. Park Lane could follow suit under plans being studied.

The temporary schemes will be reviewed by TfL – and could become permanent.

TfL has already begun making improvements to boost social distancing using temporary infrastructure. Pavements have already been doubled in size at Camden High Street and Stoke Newington High Street and widened at six further locations* -  with more to follow in the coming weeks.

TfL has also worked with Hackney Council to close Broadway Market to through traffic and, with Royal Parks, to close through traffic at weekends to The Mall/Constitution Hill and all Royal Parks (except Regents Park).

Further improvements as part of the London Streetspace plan will include:

·       Creating new walking and cycling routes along major corridors, including temporary cycle lanes in Euston Road. TfL is also looking at creating temporary cycle lanes on Park Lane. Upgrades will also be made to existing routes including creating sections of temporary segregation from Merton to Elephant and Castle, and Pimlico to Putney. Space for cycling will be created between Catford town centre and Lewisham via the A21, and on the A23 between Oval and Streatham Hill.

·       The Cycleway 9 scheme between Kensington Olympia and Brentford, and the Cycleway 4 scheme between Tower Hill and Greenwich will be accelerated with temporary measures so the Londoners can benefit from them more quickly. Meanwhile on-street parking and lanes for cars and general traffic will be repurposed to give people on foot and on bikes more space.

·       Widening more pavements in town centres to allow people to access local essential shops and services more easily. Pavements will be widened in more than 20 locations, including in Brixton and Earl’s Court in the coming days.

·       Working to make walking and cycling in local neighbourhoods safer and more attractive by reducing the speed and volume of motor traffic. A low-traffic neighbourhood will be created in Hounslow along the future Cycleway 9 route by closing local roads to through traffic and further locations across London will follow, with TfL actively supporting boroughs to reduce motor traffic on residential streets to make walking and cycling safer and easier.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: “The capacity of our public transport will be dramatically reduced post-coronavirus as a result of the huge challenges we face around social distancing. Everyone who can work from home must continue to do so for some time to come. The emergency measures included in our major strategic London Streetspace programme will help those who have to travel to work by fast-tracking the transformation of streets across our city. Many Londoners have rediscovered the joys of walking and cycling during lockdown and, by quickly and cheaply widening pavements, creating temporary cycle lanes and closing roads to through traffic we will enable millions more people to change the way they get around our city.

“I urge the Government and boroughs to work with us to enable Londoners to switch to cleaner, more sustainable forms of transport - and reduce the pressure on other parts of our transport network – once the lockdown is eased.”

The measures announced today are just the beginning, with more information on the London Streetspace plans set to be announced shortly.

Gareth Powell, Managing Director of Surface Transport at TfL, said: “As people are choosing to walk and cycle, both for their essential journeys and for exercise during the lockdown it is vital that they have the space to do so safely and are able to continue socially distancing. The London Streetspace programme – providing more space for walking and cycling - will support that. It will also play a crucial role as London approaches the challenge of maintaining social distancing as restrictions on movement are relaxed.”

Stephen Edwards, Director of Policy & Communications at Living Streets, the UK's everyday walking charity says: "Wider pavements and low traffic neighbourhoods will undoubtably help people feel safer walking everyday journeys, especially during the coronavirus pandemic. The pandemic has highlighted the importance that walking plays in our lives; with huge numbers of Londoners walking as part of their daily exercise and for local shopping trips. Where London's pavements aren't suitable for safe social distancing, it is vital widening happens to ensure people aren't forced into the paths of oncoming traffic. Walking and cycling have a key role to play to take the pressure off public transport as we emerge from the lockdown, so it's great news that TfL are looking at enabling walkers and people cycling to travel safely. We look forward to working with them on this project."

Giulio Ferrini, Sustrans London Head of Built Environment, said:“As the charity making it easier for people to walk and cycle, we’re excited to see ambitious plans at a London-wide and borough level. Local authorities are critical in reshaping our streets to strengthen London’s resilience now and as we emerge from lockdown. A potential surge in car use would clog up our streets with traffic, choke our lungs with pollution and exacerbate inequality. Now is the time to take positive action that will give all Londoners a cleaner city to live and work in. Bold actions from boroughs today can make a tangible difference to Londoners’ daily lives and will lead to a healthier, happier and fairer London as travel restrictions are lifted in the weeks to come.”

Dr Ashok Sinha, CEO of the London Cycling Campaign, said: “As the lockdown is eased, London will need to get moving again, but in a manner that maintains social distancing. The only way to do this effectively - whilst also avoiding a calamitous return to toxic air, high carbon emissions and traffic-choked streets - is to make it easier and safer for millions of people to walk and cycle. Large numbers of Londoners have already taken to cycling for essential travel and exercise during lockdown; the demand is there, and the Mayor’s new Streetspace plan can and should be the start of a permanent transition to a greener, healthier and more resilient city.”

Since London entered lockdown on 23 March, TfL has - as part of the national strategy to beat the virus - been urging Londoners to only make essential journeys.

TfL will continue to look at its existing walking and cycling projects to see where these could be used to create space for people walking and cycling more quickly.  

The new measures will build on TfL’s work, which has seen roads across London transformed under the Healthy Streets programme. The amount of protected space for cycling in London has tripled over the past four years, while major projects across the capital such as the transformation of Highbury Corner have increased in the amount of space available for people on foot. There are currently 160km of signed Cycleways across London.

Specific measures of London Streetspace will be announced in the coming weeks.

Sadiq Khan visit to Wembley Pak cancelled

A General Election campaigning visit to Wembley Park by London Mayor Sadiq Khan has been cancelled folowing the London Bridge attack.

'Don't let the council kick us out!' St Raph's residents come out fighting, insisting they have the final say on the future of the estate

Will the green space become the preserve of private flats as it did in West Hendon?

 This is a report from one of those St Rapahel's residents attending Monday's meeting held independently to discuss Brent Council's proposals for the future of the estate:

There was a good turn out at both meetings held by St Rapahel’s Estate residents on Monday evening  about Brent Council’s proposals to either demolish and rebuild the estate, with some private housing, or refurbish it with some additional floors above the flats and some new housing.

At least 98% of the residents who turned up wanted to stay in their homes and  many signed the petition for refurbishment, the option that  allows them to do so.

Families and the elderly were asking, "What can we do?  What can we do to stop this? We answered. “We must  keep telling the council that they stated. 'You the residents have the final say.’”

Councillor Muhammed Butt was invited to the meetings and attended alongside a senior member of  PPCR Associates, Lorraine Ophelia. The Independent Advisor company  that had been chosen only reluctantly by resident.

Residents questioned  Cllr Butt about the proposals for the estate  but as usual they didn't get any straight forward answers.  He got very agitated and angry at times.

The majority of residents did not want to vote for any of the independent advisors put forward by the council and wanted more time to have the choice of finding their own. They were unhappy that they had not been involved in the procurement process and also wanted it rescheduled due to the small turn out at the Independent Advisor selection meeting.

This is an edited version of the speech given by resident John Wood at the meetings:

I want to thank you for coming along this evening. My Name is John Wood I am a council tenant and have lived happily with my wife and family on St Raphs estate for over 25 years. Along with other concerned residents and stakeholders we have funded and organised this meeting, as the council have ignored our requests to facilitate a meeting of the residents for the residents. We believe they are deliberately trying to prevent us from joining together to oppose their plans for St. Raphs. I know that you will all have your own views and preferences about what should happen, but I hope we are all united by the belief that nothing should happen without the consent and approval of the majority of those affected by those plans.

Can I ask a question if there were no plans for redevelopment or refurbishment how many of you like me would be happy to continue living on St. Raphs? Could I have a show of hands please?

So that would be the majority then...

As you will no doubt be aware the council have made a decision that they are going to build some new homes on the estate. They put forward 2 proposals.

.        1.)  That they build homes on the available land with the possibility of building more floors on top of some the existing flats. 


.        2.)  That they will demolish the whole estate and rebuild new homes. 


.         

They have said that ultimately it is us the residents who will get to choose which option they will go with. Brent are collecting our views in a very controversial way. No ballot of the residents, no open recorded meetings only closed and secretive drop in meetings at which we’re told not to record anything.

To date they have managed to hold a three public meetings, where there was absolute chaos. After that they held meetings, drop in sessions. We were told that we could not record these meetings and they insisted that we be split into small groups. people could ask questions of the councillors and the officials present with only that group hearing the replies. No record of what was asked or said.

Then there was the election of the Independent advisor. Sadly, only 2 of the original 5 bodies invited to tender made presentation. Reluctantly we voted and there was a clear winner. With a total of 47 votes how can this be right there are over 1100 homes being affected by these proposals.

The council promised that they would put the minutes of the evening onto the info page on the council website to date this has not happened.

Oh yeah, did you get the newsletter issue 2? What a crock, page 2 “you said, we did”.... We wanted clear accessible information. “We are regularly updating the web page.”  January was the most recent update. You said you wanted us to address your concerns publicly and in writing. No one has had the decency to reply to my expressed concerns perhaps they missed me out as they were so busy replying to all of yours.

The drop in sessions were no more than talking shops no one I have spoken to has a clear understanding or was less in the dark than myself, about what is happening. Indeed, confusion reigned it appeared that some had been told one thing and others another. So understanding of what, when, why and how was as clear as mud. At first I thought this was just poor organisation on the part of the council, but have since realised it was the intention of the council not to allow the people to organise, record and reflect on the issues. Keep them in the dark and feed them Sh... crap.

I have lobbied the Council and the leader of the Council, Cllr. Muhammed Butt and requested that they provide a meeting room and facilitate a meeting at the children’s centre on the estate, for the residents so that we may discuss in open forum and debate the issues so that we may be able to compose questions and raise our concerns and take this back to the council for answers. To date the only person who has had the courtesy to reply on the 7^th March, was Cllr Ezeajughi. Who in his reply said;

“Regarding your request for a meeting at the children’s centre, do discuss that with the officers when they contact you. (No one has ever contacted me.) however you may recall that we had the residents meeting there on 16^th December and realised that the venue was not suitable (not large enough) to contain people.”

No alternative being made available, we contacted Father Patrick who kindly agreed to allow us to use the church hall for the purpose of this evening I would like to heartedly thank him for agreeing to allow us to meet here.

Brent have now entered the next phase of the managed consultation process where the independent advisor will liaise with the residents in order that they can understand the will of the residents i.e. do they want option 1 or option 2.

It’s my belief that this again it will not be given over to open debate or any form of ballot. No it will be done as a conversation. Would you like to see more cleaner environment? Would you like to have better facilities? Would you like a more secure environment? And so it will go. Then the independent advisor will report back to Brent. Amazingly they will report a massive majority in favour of improvement we will all be in agreement, after all which of us wouldn’t like to see all the proposed improvements we been waiting years just to minor improvement.

The only problem with all of this is that the best way to accommodate the expressed wishes of us all to see improvement, will of course be to kick us all out of our homes and demolish the estate so that they can have a private developer come in, use the prime river frontage overlooking the park to develop new million pound apartments for private owners and then build some high density boxes in the sky to decamp people like me, the social tenants into.

I urge you to resist allowing Brent to kick us out and use our homes to pay for the new estate. We must unite and speak as one if we are to overcome Brent’s dastardly plan.

I acknowledge that some, may be even the majority, will disagree with my preference to remain in my home. As is your right. For those of you with concerns I urge you to join in asking Brent and the independent advisor to ballot us. This will prove the will of the people and we can move on with whichever is the majority view.

However, I would urge you to look closely at the proposal if you are an owner, freeholder or leaseholder if you decide to accept the council’s offer and sell, will you be advantaged or disadvantaged?  Not only will you have to find a new home but you will have to move all of your possessions, pay stamp duty on your new home, as well as say good bye to all your friends and neighbours on St Raphs. How exasperating and upsetting would it be? When you could just say no to redevelopment and stay in your home.

Some leaseholders have expressed to me that they are concerned that if Refurbishment occurs and the council build new dwellings above their homes, then the council will hit them with the cost of these works. I say to those of you with such fears they can only do this if you stand alone, but if we stand together, we can stop them. If the council want to develop new homes, then the council should fully fund those new homes indeed compensate those affected and inconvenienced by these works after all it is the council / landlord who will profit from the rental income. Not you! so why should you be made to pay!

Some tenants who are living in overcrowded conditions have expressed they want redevelopment as the council have said that when they are rehoused they will be given suitable accommodation. I say if that is the case why have they simply not offered this now! Answer they don’t have anywhere, so I urge you to see past their misinformation. If St. Raphs is redeveloped we will all be moved out to temporary accommodation, don’t worry it will only be for a little while whilst we rebuild (up to five years) Then you can come back to lovely new accommodation suitable for your needs. Brent are of course hoping that some of the more elderly people will have passed on and that some of the younger ones will have reached 18 so no longer need to be housed by the council, but don’t worry they can go and rent one of those new overpriced flats they are  building by the stadium.  There are thousands of them.

Sadiq Khan the London Mayor has said redevelopment or refurbishment must be done in consultation and agreement of the residents. So if we can show that there is a majority in favour of refurbishment then Brent will not be able to push forward and kick us out of our homes.

We have requested that the Independent Advisor hold a postal ballot of the residents, asking do they want refurbishment with infill or demolition and redevelopment.

As well as this we are asking people to sign a petition so that we can evidence the will of the residents to remain in their homes.

After this we would like to propose that we form a formal residents group and have nominations for a chair person so that we can make formal representation to Brent to have our views and concerns dealt with in an open and honest way.

London boroughs ‘sharply divided’ over Mayoral rent policy - where does Brent stand?

A continuing issue in Brent, as in other London boroughs, is the precisie defintion of what is 'affordable' rent (often defined in planning applications as 'up to 80% of market rent' recognised as unaffordable for most ordinary families). This article highlights the issues regarding 'social rent'. First published at 24housing.co.uk.

With this week’s welter of housing announcements out of London, evidence has emerged of the boroughs being sharply divided over Sadiq Khan’s rent policy.

Campaigners have seized on data released under FoI they say shows that, for new council homes, the Mayor has agreed higher rents than the capital’s Council tenants have ever paid before – and in five boroughs yet higher unspecified rents have been agreed.

Responding to the claim, the Mayor’s Office said Khan specifically defined London Affordable Rent to have rent caps based on social rent levels – enabling money from national Affordable Rent programme to be spent on social rent level housing in the capita.

But seven other Boroughs seem to have have defied the Mayor’s policies.

With government funding, Khan has launched a £1bn programme ‘Building Council Homes for Londoners’, for new council-built homes in London – over 14,000 homes are to be built with the first round of funding.

The snag campaigners have caught onto has the Mayor promoting his London Affordable Rent (LAR – or ‘Mayor’s Rent’) which is £50 pw higher than standard council rents.

“Compared to an average London Council rent of £105.87 pw, the current London Affordable Rent rates applied to London’s stock mix produce an average of £158.85 pw.

So the average uplift is +£52.98 weekly, or +50.0%, all plus service charges,” says Paul Burnham, Secretary, Haringey Defend Council Housing.

The figures show:

·      Bedsit £150.03 instead of £82.93 (£67.10 more, +80.9%) London Stock 18,643

·      One-bed £150.03 instead of £92.61 (£57.42 more, +62.0%) London Stock 118,090

·      Two-bed £158.84 instead of £105.29 (£53.55 more, +50.9%) London Stock 137,511

·      Three-bed £167.67 instead of £120.49 (£47.18 more, +39.0%) London Stock 100,012

·      Four-bed £176.49 instead of £138.76 (£37.73 more, +27.2%) London Stock 14,656

·      Five-bed £185.31 instead of £153.03 (£32.28 more, +21.1%) London Stock 1,926

·      Six or more bedrooms £194.13 instead of £165.70 (£28.43 more, +17.2%) London Stock 447

“The Mayor says that London Affordable Rent is social rent, but seven London boroughs disagree,” said Burnham.

According to Burnham’s interpretation that’s Haringey, Kensington and Chelsea, Camden, Hackney, Greenwich, Southwark, and Waltham Forest.

The City of London, which owns council housing stock mainly in Inner London but outside the Square Mile, makes the list too.

“It gets worse, the Mayor has agreed that six boroughs can set rents for 1,166 homes at new, higher levels above what we were told were to be the Caps for Mayor’s Rent, said Burnham.

“We do not know why the Mayor has agreed this, and whether or not these rents are supposed to be Affordable of Intermediate – we have sent an urgent message to the GLA to find out,” he said.

The five even higher-rent boroughs are said to be Sutton (16 homes), Tower Hamlets (375), Brent (124), Barking and Dagenham (156) and Harrow (273).

Though named in the initial campaign claim, Hammersmith & Fulham said it had still to respond to the FoI.

GLA reports recognise higher social and affordable rents as a leading cause of poverty for lower income households with children, and people with low and uncertain incomes.

“But by his actions the Mayor is undermining Council Social Rent which is the gold standard of rental affordability.

“Decisions about rent policy are made by people who do not have any idea of the household expenses and family budgets of working class people,” Burnham said.

A spokesperson for the Mayor’s office said the Mayor is “very pleased” by the response to his Building Council Homes for Londoners programme, which will see councils build more than 11,000 homes at social rent levels.

“The national Government allows affordable rent to be up to 80% of market rents – a level the Mayor does not consider to be genuinely affordable to Londoners on low incomes in most parts of the capital.

“He specifically defined London Affordable Rent to have rent caps based on social rent levels, enabling money from national Affordable Rent programme to be spent on social rent level housing in the capital,” the spokesperson said.

Supporting its argument, the Mayor’s office released additional information showing:

·      Building Council Homes for Londoners allows all boroughs to set rent levels for the c.11,000 referred to above at or below London Affordable Rent caps, which includes social rents

·      London Affordable Rent is based on 2016 formula social rents and is only offered on new lets

·      Current average council rents on new lets are higher than current average council rents which include rents set historically

GLA grant allocation by housing tenure

Key

LAR – ‘Mayor’s Rent’, London Affordable Rent ‘at benchmark’.

SR – Social Rent.

LAR/SR homes – rented homes not yet allocated by tenure.

LLR – London Living Rent.

LSO – London Shared Ownership.

LLR/SO – intermediate homes not yet allocated by tenure.

Boroughs with all social/affordable rent as London Affordable Rent

Barnet £8,700,000. Total 87.                                       LAR 87.

Lewisham £37,700,000 Total 384.                             LAR 384.

Sutton £6,500,000 Total: 81.                                       LAR 65, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 16.

Redbridge (funding from Right to Buy receipts) Total 400. LAR 400.

Tower Hamlets £13,000,000 Total: 675.                  LAR 300, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 375.

Croydon £61,288,000 Total: 888.                               LAR 141, LAR/SR homes 326, LLR/SO homes 421.

Brent £65,610,000 Total 817.                                      LAR 572, LSO 121, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 124.

Ealing £99,352,000 Total 1,138.                                 LAR 934, LLR 71, LSO 133.

Hounslow £63,252,000 Total 741.                             LAR 657, LSO 84.

Barking & Dagenham £25,338,000 Total: 565.      LAR 228, LSO 156, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 181.

Havering £24,046,000 Total: 282.                              LAR 215, LSO 67.

Wandsworth £12,452,000 Total: 174.  LAR 22, Intermediate home ownership 2, 83 LAR/SR homes, LLR/SO homes 67.

Hammersmith & Fulham £15,308,000 Total: 251. LAR 115, LSO 13, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 123.

Harrow £32,144,000 Total: 618. LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 273, LAR/SR homes 307, LLR/SO homes 38.

Newham £107,476,000 Total: 1,123. SR 1,056 [we think that all of these rented homes are in fact LAR], LSO 67.

Boroughs with all social/affordable rent as Social Rent

Camden £30,800,000 Total: 308.                                                               SR 308.

Greenwich £32,600,000 Total: 588.                                                          SR 588.

Kensington and Chelsea £33,600,000. Total: 336.                               SR 336.

Hackney £45,556,000 Total 949.                                                                SR: 502, LSO 447.

Haringey £62,858,000 Total: 848.                                                              SR 567, LLR 232, LSO 49.

Waltham Forest £25,518,000. Total 293.                                                SR 232, LSO 61.

City of London £14,880,000. Total 156.                                                   SR 146, LSO 10.

Southwark £89,494,138 Total: 926.                                                          SR 891, LSO 35.

Boroughs with both Social Rent and London Affordable Rent

Enfield £18,108,000 Total: 571.                  LAR 392, SR 44, LSO 61, LAR homes (above benchmark rent) 74.

Islington £24,200,000 Total: 465.                               LAR 407, SR 58.

Hillingdon £11,678,000 Total: 347.                           LAR 40, SR 86, LLR 20, LSO 201.

Kingston £67,844,000 Total: 713.                              LAR 75, SR 590, LSO 48.

-->