It's a while since I have posted - so I thought that I would write and update on a few issues of importance for South Camberwell.
Bakerloo Line Extension
The petition which I launched a few weeks ago now has over 2100 signatures - showing that there is real support for the Bakerloo line to be extended to Camberwell and Peckham.
But last week I made a real breakthrough by getting the support of Boris Johnson for the extension. After laying out the case for him and asking for his support he said "Deal". The next day he gave a speech stating his commitment to the Bakerloo extension through Southwark, Lewisham and on into Bromley.
If this major piece of infrastructure work is to happen we will have to have the support of the Mayor, TfL and the government. But without the Mayor's support this is an idea which will simply not happen.
So if you haven't signed the petition yet, please do so at bit.ly/WqLZaa - and help to make this 100 year old ambition to bring the tube to Camberwell a reality.
Rubbish at Denmark Hill Station
As I walked along Champion Park on Saturday I was struck at the amount of rubbish beyond the railings on Network Rail land. Cups, cans and crisp packets littered the area. I have been in touch with Network Rail today and hope to get the area cleaned up - it really needs urgent attention.
Foxes
The RSPCA have written to me urging me to ignore the Mayor of London's calls for action on foxes. They write that at least 70% of the fox population would have to be killed each year in order to have an impact on numbers in London - and that experience shows that where such a cull has been attempted the area which rids itself of foxes is soon the new home for different foxes.
I will meet with the RSPCA to explore what else can be done, as I know that this is a real issue of concern for many residents in South Camberwell.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Thursday, January 17, 2013
Elephant Progress - Heygate Masterplan Approved
An historic and positive step was taken on Tuesday night when Southwark's Planning Committee approved the Masterplan for the regeneration of the Heygate - the sprawling estate at the heart of the Elephant & Castle which is central to the regeneration of the area. The estate has been virtually empty for the last two years and has become a symbol of the failure of the regeneration to make any progress over that time.
The regeneration of the Elephant was conceived as an idea 15 years ago. It has been slow progress getting to this point, but it now looks as if the regeneration will become a reality over the next decade and a half. We still await the proposals for the regeneration of the shopping centre, but with a new leisure centre already under construction; the southern roundabout having undergone a major revamp; and significant progress with TfL towards delivering an improved northern roundabout and access via escalator to the Northern Line, there is real momentum to the project.
Tuesday's meeting was not without objection or controversy. With any scheme which brings 2500 new homes; 1250 long-term jobs, a new park and public realm improvements, it is unlikely that everyone will be on the same page at the same time. And many of the objectors rightly wanted to challenge the council and the developers to ensure that the best deal was being delivered for Southwark.
Two of the most controversial elements of the masterplan application concerned the level of affordable housing being delivered and the amount of car parking on site. I have previously blogged about the affordable housing at the Heygate, but it is crucial to note that the landscape for the delivery of affordable housing changed radically in May 2010 when the Coalition cut grant subsidy for social housing by £6 billion. This meant that for every unit of social housing on the Heygate site approximately £120,000 of grant subsidy was lost. The target for delivering 35% affordable housing on-site became impossible from that time. There are moments throughout the 15 year history of this project when 35% or more affordable housing could have been delivered - but those moments and those opportunities were not seized by the then Administration.
But the masterplan approved on Tuesday will still deliver 25% affordable housing - much more than the viability tests undertaken by Lend Lease demonstrated; more than the District Valuer thought could be delivered; and much more than is being delivered on similar schemes across London. Remember that the Government's Growth and Infrastructure Bill gives developers the option to negotiate the level of affordable housing which they deliver down to zero on stalled schemes. So 25% affordable housing on the Heygate scheme in the current climate is a fair result. Would I like to see more? Yes. Can more be achieved within the short-term? No.
So I think it's right to place progress on the regeneration of the Elephant as a priority and support a scheme which delivers the majority of elements which I and the community want to see. I simply don't believe that waiting for something better to turn up is a proper way of managing a major project like the Elephant regeneration or responsible government. I'll leave it to others to argue that inaction is better.
I respect the views of those who have opposed the regeneration of the Elephant. I think they're wrong to continue their opposition, but that doesn't mean that they haven't had a major impact on the scheme which was approved on Tuesday. They have.
The decision on Tuesday to support the regeneration of the Elephant is good news. As I've already said - it means 2500 new homes; 5000 jobs created during the construction phase and 1250 in the longer term; a new civic presence in the heart of the scheme; the largest new park in Zone 1 for 70 years; major transport improvements for the Elephant and a host of new opportunities.
It's been a long time coming, but the Elephant is entering a new phase in its' exciting history.
The regeneration of the Elephant was conceived as an idea 15 years ago. It has been slow progress getting to this point, but it now looks as if the regeneration will become a reality over the next decade and a half. We still await the proposals for the regeneration of the shopping centre, but with a new leisure centre already under construction; the southern roundabout having undergone a major revamp; and significant progress with TfL towards delivering an improved northern roundabout and access via escalator to the Northern Line, there is real momentum to the project.
Tuesday's meeting was not without objection or controversy. With any scheme which brings 2500 new homes; 1250 long-term jobs, a new park and public realm improvements, it is unlikely that everyone will be on the same page at the same time. And many of the objectors rightly wanted to challenge the council and the developers to ensure that the best deal was being delivered for Southwark.
Two of the most controversial elements of the masterplan application concerned the level of affordable housing being delivered and the amount of car parking on site. I have previously blogged about the affordable housing at the Heygate, but it is crucial to note that the landscape for the delivery of affordable housing changed radically in May 2010 when the Coalition cut grant subsidy for social housing by £6 billion. This meant that for every unit of social housing on the Heygate site approximately £120,000 of grant subsidy was lost. The target for delivering 35% affordable housing on-site became impossible from that time. There are moments throughout the 15 year history of this project when 35% or more affordable housing could have been delivered - but those moments and those opportunities were not seized by the then Administration.
But the masterplan approved on Tuesday will still deliver 25% affordable housing - much more than the viability tests undertaken by Lend Lease demonstrated; more than the District Valuer thought could be delivered; and much more than is being delivered on similar schemes across London. Remember that the Government's Growth and Infrastructure Bill gives developers the option to negotiate the level of affordable housing which they deliver down to zero on stalled schemes. So 25% affordable housing on the Heygate scheme in the current climate is a fair result. Would I like to see more? Yes. Can more be achieved within the short-term? No.
So I think it's right to place progress on the regeneration of the Elephant as a priority and support a scheme which delivers the majority of elements which I and the community want to see. I simply don't believe that waiting for something better to turn up is a proper way of managing a major project like the Elephant regeneration or responsible government. I'll leave it to others to argue that inaction is better.
I respect the views of those who have opposed the regeneration of the Elephant. I think they're wrong to continue their opposition, but that doesn't mean that they haven't had a major impact on the scheme which was approved on Tuesday. They have.
The decision on Tuesday to support the regeneration of the Elephant is good news. As I've already said - it means 2500 new homes; 5000 jobs created during the construction phase and 1250 in the longer term; a new civic presence in the heart of the scheme; the largest new park in Zone 1 for 70 years; major transport improvements for the Elephant and a host of new opportunities.
It's been a long time coming, but the Elephant is entering a new phase in its' exciting history.
Monday, January 14, 2013
Emergency Services in Southwark
Southwark's emergency services face an unprecedented attack. With the closure of three Police Stations, one Fire Station, and the partial closure of another, the presence of the emergency services in our borough will be hugely scaled back.
Last week I chaired a meeting at City Hall with Stephen Greenhalgh, the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and Assistant Commissioner Simon Byrne - who is in charge of territorial policing in London. The meeting exposed real concerns from the public and local representatives about the loss of the three police stations at East Dulwich, Rotherhithe and Camberwell, and equal concerns about the impact which budget savings will have on Safer Neighbourhood Teams across the borough. At the meeting we were told that Peckham Police Station would remain as the only 24 hour station in the borough, although this was subsequently corrected to Walworth.
I challenged Boris Johnson in a letter dated the 11th of October 2012 to keep his pledge about the future of police stations in Southwark and in his response to me on the 13th of December 2012 he reiterated his "clear commitment that no police front counter will close unless and equivalent or better facility for public access has been identified".
As a council we are working with the Met and MOPAC to find those "equivalent or better" facilities, but we have not been told what if any budget the police have for these new front counters. At a time when all of our budgets are being slashed the council cannot just hand over premises or parts of premises to the police without any payment.
There seemed little if any clarity from the police about the structure of Safer Neighbourhood Teams going forward. And although the much vaunted restructure will apparently bring 1200 new front line police officers into the city's policing, only 2 of those seem to be heading to Southwark.
At the same time the Fire Brigade have announced the closure of Southwark Fire Station and the loss of a fire engine from Peckham. On the day when the Lakanal fire inquest has begun at Lambeth Town Hall it seems remarkable that the fire service are contemplating removing any fire engines from Peckham. Surely it would be better to wait for the outcome of the inquest before making any decision about how Peckham will be covered by the fire service in future?
And with The Shard and the London Bridge area bringing new buildings, new attention - and to some extent new risk - to Southwark it seems remarkable that the fire service would choose to close the fire station which is closest to this part of Central London. Apart from some general justification about ensuring that every part of London is within 6 minutes of a fire station I have yet to hear any specific justification for why Central London is losing so much support.
These are truly worrying times for our emergency services and for Southwark.
Last week I chaired a meeting at City Hall with Stephen Greenhalgh, the Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime and Assistant Commissioner Simon Byrne - who is in charge of territorial policing in London. The meeting exposed real concerns from the public and local representatives about the loss of the three police stations at East Dulwich, Rotherhithe and Camberwell, and equal concerns about the impact which budget savings will have on Safer Neighbourhood Teams across the borough. At the meeting we were told that Peckham Police Station would remain as the only 24 hour station in the borough, although this was subsequently corrected to Walworth.
I challenged Boris Johnson in a letter dated the 11th of October 2012 to keep his pledge about the future of police stations in Southwark and in his response to me on the 13th of December 2012 he reiterated his "clear commitment that no police front counter will close unless and equivalent or better facility for public access has been identified".
As a council we are working with the Met and MOPAC to find those "equivalent or better" facilities, but we have not been told what if any budget the police have for these new front counters. At a time when all of our budgets are being slashed the council cannot just hand over premises or parts of premises to the police without any payment.
There seemed little if any clarity from the police about the structure of Safer Neighbourhood Teams going forward. And although the much vaunted restructure will apparently bring 1200 new front line police officers into the city's policing, only 2 of those seem to be heading to Southwark.
At the same time the Fire Brigade have announced the closure of Southwark Fire Station and the loss of a fire engine from Peckham. On the day when the Lakanal fire inquest has begun at Lambeth Town Hall it seems remarkable that the fire service are contemplating removing any fire engines from Peckham. Surely it would be better to wait for the outcome of the inquest before making any decision about how Peckham will be covered by the fire service in future?
And with The Shard and the London Bridge area bringing new buildings, new attention - and to some extent new risk - to Southwark it seems remarkable that the fire service would choose to close the fire station which is closest to this part of Central London. Apart from some general justification about ensuring that every part of London is within 6 minutes of a fire station I have yet to hear any specific justification for why Central London is losing so much support.
These are truly worrying times for our emergency services and for Southwark.
Albrighton All Go!
The Albrighton Community Centre in South Camberwell is a brilliant example of how a well-managed and new community resource can really make a difference. When I first became a councillor in 2002 the Centre was closed and unused. It was in need of repairs and neither the council nor the community were taking the lead in sorting things out.
But in the past decade under the leadership of Steve Hedger and some truly committed residents the centre has been transformed into the hub of life in South Camberwell. From toddlers to older people, the Centre now has activities for everyone. It hosted last year's Southwark Tenants Conference, and is booked up every day of the week. This Christmas saw the first older people's Christmas lunch run at the Centre - hailed as a great success. And the innovative book stall in reception helps raise funds for the Centre's ongoing work.
The number and level of activities might not have been possible without the new Centre building, which was delivered as part of the regeneration of the estate. It has really made a difference.
So a massive "congratulations" to everyone who has and continues to make the Albrighton Centre an example of what a real community centre should be.
But in the past decade under the leadership of Steve Hedger and some truly committed residents the centre has been transformed into the hub of life in South Camberwell. From toddlers to older people, the Centre now has activities for everyone. It hosted last year's Southwark Tenants Conference, and is booked up every day of the week. This Christmas saw the first older people's Christmas lunch run at the Centre - hailed as a great success. And the innovative book stall in reception helps raise funds for the Centre's ongoing work.
The number and level of activities might not have been possible without the new Centre building, which was delivered as part of the regeneration of the estate. It has really made a difference.
Monday, October 15, 2012
Councillor Helen Morrissey
My friend and colleague, Cllr Helen Morrissey, one of the councillors for East Walworth ward since May 2010, died on Friday night after battling cancer over the past year.
Helen had been Chief Whip of the Labour Group since May 2011 and was the first woman to hold that post for at least 20 years. She brought great humour and firmness to the role - she loved being involved in the politics and machinery of the council's decision-making process.
Helen stood unsuccessfully for election to the council in 2006 in East Dulwich ward. She was disappointed not to have been elected in her home ward at that time, but threw herself with even greater commitment into the campaign in East Walworth in 2010 with her colleagues Martin Seaton and Darren Merrill. The look of joy on her face when she won her seat was only surpassed by the absolute pride she felt in being a Southwark councillor. She really believed in the importance and value of local government, and particularly in what Labour is delivering in Southwark.
Helen had suffered with an arthritic condition for many years, which sometimes meant that she was slower getting around. But she always used this to her advantage - relishing the fact that some people underestimated her political acumen. She was also a great cat lover - having given a home to many cats during her life.
She was a very funny person and could dissect a person or an argument with a real but warm wit. Helen was liked and respected by people right across the political spectrum. If she gave you her word it would always be kept.
Helen was absolutely committed to equalities and argued strongly for the rights of all those who were from a minority group or suffered with a disability.
She will be greatly missed by me and all of her colleagues in Southwark Labour.
Helen had been Chief Whip of the Labour Group since May 2011 and was the first woman to hold that post for at least 20 years. She brought great humour and firmness to the role - she loved being involved in the politics and machinery of the council's decision-making process.
Helen stood unsuccessfully for election to the council in 2006 in East Dulwich ward. She was disappointed not to have been elected in her home ward at that time, but threw herself with even greater commitment into the campaign in East Walworth in 2010 with her colleagues Martin Seaton and Darren Merrill. The look of joy on her face when she won her seat was only surpassed by the absolute pride she felt in being a Southwark councillor. She really believed in the importance and value of local government, and particularly in what Labour is delivering in Southwark.
She was a very funny person and could dissect a person or an argument with a real but warm wit. Helen was liked and respected by people right across the political spectrum. If she gave you her word it would always be kept.
Helen was absolutely committed to equalities and argued strongly for the rights of all those who were from a minority group or suffered with a disability.
She will be greatly missed by me and all of her colleagues in Southwark Labour.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Social Housing at Elephant & Castle
The master plan for the regeneration of the Heygate Estate site at Elephant and Castle has now been submitted by our development partners and will be decided by the Planning Committee in December. The application includes a commitment to provide at least 25% affordable housing across the site - made up of 50% social rented housing and 50% shared ownership.
The commitment to 25% affordable housing reflects the agreement which we reached with Lend Lease in July 2010 after we had won the local elections that year. Until that point the agreement between the council and Lend Lease included no minimum guarantee of affordable housing, it having been decided by the previous Lib Dem administration that this would be dealt with through the usual planning process. Since July 2010 we have been criticised heavily by the Lib Dems in Southwark for getting the 25% guarantee and foregoing some previoulsy guaranteed payments from Lend Lease in return.
Southwark Council planning policy still requires 35% affordable housing to be delivered in large housing developments; but several factors have affected the ability of developers right across London and the UK to deliver this sort of level of affordable housing in projects. Those factors include the economic slump since 2008 and the decision by the Tory/LibDem government to slash support for social home building. Until May 2010 every social housing unit built attracted government support of around £120,000; that figure has now been reduced to just £25,000. Both of these factors have impacted on the economic viability of major house-building projects. As we have seen from recent government announcements, they are now proposing that developers can go back to local authorities to reduce the requirement for social housing in certain projects to zero.
Looking around London we can see the same impact. At Battersea Power Station Wandsworth Council has agreed to just 15% of affordable housing in a major regeneration scheme; in Tower Hamlets the Council has agreed to 18% affordable housing at Wood Wharf; and at Earls Court Kensington and Chelsea have agreed to no affordable housing in the second phase of a major regeneration scheme. All these councils want to see regeneration happen in their boroughs, but have been forced to accept hugely reduced levels of affordable housing after developers and their own planners have calculated the amount of affordable housing which is actually viable in those schemes.
All planning applications undergo an independently verified viability test which determines the level of affordable housing which can be delivered on a scheme. In Southwark that test has been carried out in respect of the Heygate site and demonstrates that the amount of affordable housing which can be delivered is in the region of just 7% to 8%. This is the amount of affordable housing which would have been delivered through the usual planning process - the approach which the Lib Dems were taking when they were in power and which they still urge us to take! This means the difference between approximately 620 affordable homes which will be delivered under the 25% guarantee which Southwark Labour negotiated in July 2010 and less than 250 through the Lib Dem approach.
What is more we have also negotiated relatively low rent rates for the new social housing which will be delivered. The Coalition - supported by local Lib Dem MP Simon Hughes - introduced "affordable rents" in 2010 - which for many are anything but affordable - but which enable housing associations and other social landlords to charge up to 80% of local market rent rates for social housing which they let. Many housing associations have adopted this level of rent and on average most have set their new rent levels at between 65% and 75% of market rates. In comparison the rent for a council home equates to approximately 35% of market rates.
At the Heygate site we have negotiated that rents for 1 and 2 bed homes will be no more than 50% of market rates and for homes of 3 bedrooms or more the rent will effectively be the same as council rent rates. This means that there will be a genuinely mixed income community living in the new homes that will be built at the Heygate site.
I hope that the economic climate will improve to such an extent that later detailed planning applications for the Heygate site will mean that more than 25% affordable housing can be delivered. But it is clear that there is a long way to go to lift the scheme above that point given that we have a starting point of only 8% on planning viability tests.
And it is also clear that simply standing on the sidelines demanding 35% or more affordable housing is utterly unrealistic. The only reason we are going to achieve 25% affordable housing at this time is because Lend Lease have a cast iron contractual obligation - negotiated by us in July 2010 - to deliver that much.
So this is no "sell out" by the Council for the regeneration of the Elephant. This is not the Council being weak in the face of a large developer. It clearly shows that the Council under this Labour administration has been strong and it has been right. I am genuinely appalled when I imagine what situation we might be facing if the Lib Dems had remained in power in 2010 - or if they were in charge now. We would either have a tiny level of affordable housing at the Elephant & Castle or we would once again be mired in the dither and delay which was the hallmark of their entire approach to large regeneration schemes - unwilling or unable to make a decision.
Southwark's Labour administration is determined to deliver on the regeneration of the Elephant & Castle; to deliver on a scheme which has been discussed since 1998 and which the people of Walworth deserve to achieve the renewal of their area.
The commitment to 25% affordable housing reflects the agreement which we reached with Lend Lease in July 2010 after we had won the local elections that year. Until that point the agreement between the council and Lend Lease included no minimum guarantee of affordable housing, it having been decided by the previous Lib Dem administration that this would be dealt with through the usual planning process. Since July 2010 we have been criticised heavily by the Lib Dems in Southwark for getting the 25% guarantee and foregoing some previoulsy guaranteed payments from Lend Lease in return.
Southwark Council planning policy still requires 35% affordable housing to be delivered in large housing developments; but several factors have affected the ability of developers right across London and the UK to deliver this sort of level of affordable housing in projects. Those factors include the economic slump since 2008 and the decision by the Tory/LibDem government to slash support for social home building. Until May 2010 every social housing unit built attracted government support of around £120,000; that figure has now been reduced to just £25,000. Both of these factors have impacted on the economic viability of major house-building projects. As we have seen from recent government announcements, they are now proposing that developers can go back to local authorities to reduce the requirement for social housing in certain projects to zero.
Looking around London we can see the same impact. At Battersea Power Station Wandsworth Council has agreed to just 15% of affordable housing in a major regeneration scheme; in Tower Hamlets the Council has agreed to 18% affordable housing at Wood Wharf; and at Earls Court Kensington and Chelsea have agreed to no affordable housing in the second phase of a major regeneration scheme. All these councils want to see regeneration happen in their boroughs, but have been forced to accept hugely reduced levels of affordable housing after developers and their own planners have calculated the amount of affordable housing which is actually viable in those schemes.
All planning applications undergo an independently verified viability test which determines the level of affordable housing which can be delivered on a scheme. In Southwark that test has been carried out in respect of the Heygate site and demonstrates that the amount of affordable housing which can be delivered is in the region of just 7% to 8%. This is the amount of affordable housing which would have been delivered through the usual planning process - the approach which the Lib Dems were taking when they were in power and which they still urge us to take! This means the difference between approximately 620 affordable homes which will be delivered under the 25% guarantee which Southwark Labour negotiated in July 2010 and less than 250 through the Lib Dem approach.
What is more we have also negotiated relatively low rent rates for the new social housing which will be delivered. The Coalition - supported by local Lib Dem MP Simon Hughes - introduced "affordable rents" in 2010 - which for many are anything but affordable - but which enable housing associations and other social landlords to charge up to 80% of local market rent rates for social housing which they let. Many housing associations have adopted this level of rent and on average most have set their new rent levels at between 65% and 75% of market rates. In comparison the rent for a council home equates to approximately 35% of market rates.
At the Heygate site we have negotiated that rents for 1 and 2 bed homes will be no more than 50% of market rates and for homes of 3 bedrooms or more the rent will effectively be the same as council rent rates. This means that there will be a genuinely mixed income community living in the new homes that will be built at the Heygate site.
I hope that the economic climate will improve to such an extent that later detailed planning applications for the Heygate site will mean that more than 25% affordable housing can be delivered. But it is clear that there is a long way to go to lift the scheme above that point given that we have a starting point of only 8% on planning viability tests.
And it is also clear that simply standing on the sidelines demanding 35% or more affordable housing is utterly unrealistic. The only reason we are going to achieve 25% affordable housing at this time is because Lend Lease have a cast iron contractual obligation - negotiated by us in July 2010 - to deliver that much.
So this is no "sell out" by the Council for the regeneration of the Elephant. This is not the Council being weak in the face of a large developer. It clearly shows that the Council under this Labour administration has been strong and it has been right. I am genuinely appalled when I imagine what situation we might be facing if the Lib Dems had remained in power in 2010 - or if they were in charge now. We would either have a tiny level of affordable housing at the Elephant & Castle or we would once again be mired in the dither and delay which was the hallmark of their entire approach to large regeneration schemes - unwilling or unable to make a decision.
Southwark's Labour administration is determined to deliver on the regeneration of the Elephant & Castle; to deliver on a scheme which has been discussed since 1998 and which the people of Walworth deserve to achieve the renewal of their area.
Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Olympic Victory Parade - Why isn't it coming South?
Team GB will celebrate its' success at the Olympics and Paralympics with a parade through the streets of London on September 10th. It should be a magnificent occasion, and give many Londoners an opportunity to congratulate the stars of London 2012.
When I first heard about the Olympic Parade on the 8th of August I asked the Mayor of London and others to ensure that the route reflected the wonderful legacy of the games by bringing it south of the river. The traditional route for parades of all kinds seems to be to and from Westminster and the City of London. That's great, and reflects the history of our city.
But if London 2012 has demonstrated anything it is that London has changed and is changing. The regeneration of East London will be one of the lasting impacts of these Olympics and Paralympics - a whole new and exciting part of our capital city is emerging. And some of the most iconic images of this Summer have come from the south of the river, where another new part of London is being delivered.
From Tower Bridge and Potters Fields - the only Olympic and Paralympic Live Site - to City Hall, the Shard, The Globe, Tate Modern and the London Eye - we now look south of the river for some of the most iconic sites and sights of modern London. Even cab drivers no longer see anything south of the Thames as a "no go" area!
So the Olympic Victory Parade should have celebrated the new London as much as the historic parts of our great city. An imaginative route could have passed over either Tower Bridge or London Bridge and crossed back over Southwark, Blackfriars or Waterloo bridges to bring the celebration to all Londoners and underline that these Olympics and Paralympics are about that new regenerated London which was the essence of the successful bid in Singapore in 2005.
I am disappointed that the Mayor of London has not shown imagination and leadership on this issue. It would have been a wonderful and fitting opportunity for our Olympic heroes to be honoured by Londoners on both banks of the Thames.
It's not too late for the "powers that be" to change the route. They should do so and demonstrate that they are in-touch with modern London.
But whether the route is changed or not, September 10th will be an amazing celebration of the dedication and achievement of our Olympic and Paralympic athletes. South London will salute them - even if we've got to cross the river to do so!
When I first heard about the Olympic Parade on the 8th of August I asked the Mayor of London and others to ensure that the route reflected the wonderful legacy of the games by bringing it south of the river. The traditional route for parades of all kinds seems to be to and from Westminster and the City of London. That's great, and reflects the history of our city.
But if London 2012 has demonstrated anything it is that London has changed and is changing. The regeneration of East London will be one of the lasting impacts of these Olympics and Paralympics - a whole new and exciting part of our capital city is emerging. And some of the most iconic images of this Summer have come from the south of the river, where another new part of London is being delivered.
From Tower Bridge and Potters Fields - the only Olympic and Paralympic Live Site - to City Hall, the Shard, The Globe, Tate Modern and the London Eye - we now look south of the river for some of the most iconic sites and sights of modern London. Even cab drivers no longer see anything south of the Thames as a "no go" area!
So the Olympic Victory Parade should have celebrated the new London as much as the historic parts of our great city. An imaginative route could have passed over either Tower Bridge or London Bridge and crossed back over Southwark, Blackfriars or Waterloo bridges to bring the celebration to all Londoners and underline that these Olympics and Paralympics are about that new regenerated London which was the essence of the successful bid in Singapore in 2005.
I am disappointed that the Mayor of London has not shown imagination and leadership on this issue. It would have been a wonderful and fitting opportunity for our Olympic heroes to be honoured by Londoners on both banks of the Thames.
It's not too late for the "powers that be" to change the route. They should do so and demonstrate that they are in-touch with modern London.
But whether the route is changed or not, September 10th will be an amazing celebration of the dedication and achievement of our Olympic and Paralympic athletes. South London will salute them - even if we've got to cross the river to do so!
Monday, August 20, 2012
Policy Exchange on Council Housing
The right-wing think tank, Policy Exchange, has published a report today entitled "Ending Expensive Social Tenancies". It is an unfortunate title for a paper which raises some interesting questions which we have to grapple with in Southwark.
Firstly, the blanket policy proposed by the paper of selling-off all council properties above a certain value is flawed and would undoubtedly lead to the removal of genuinely affordable social housing from certain areas.
But the concept of making sure that your assets are used well to ensure that you are tackling the serious problem of a shortage of affordable council housing is worthy of consideration. It is one of the motivations which lies behind our proposal of accepting "in lieu" payments from developers rather than requiring them to deliver on-site "affordable housing" where that "affordable housing" is anything but. On one site in the north of Southwark a person would have had to be earning in the region of £80,000 to be able to afford the payments on the affordable housing which would have been delivered under the scheme. We think it is better to take a payment from that developer - equivalent to over £100,000 per habitable room that they should have delivered - so that we can build genuinely affordable council housing with rents closer to £100 per week.
The fund of £100 million that this will generate will deliver 1000 new council homes in Southwark - more than have been built in all of London in the last 10 years.
We have also been criticised for selling council properties where the cost of refurbishing that property for future tenants is uneconomic. This probably comes closest to the Policy Exchange proposal, but is very different from it and is really no more than a pragmatic way of partly funding our Warm, Dry and Sage 'decent homes' programme. We are committed to investing £326 million in our council housing between now and 2016 - the largest programme of any social housing landlord in the country. But we cannot pay for that just by hoping that it will be paid for! So where the proper opportunity arises we have agreed to sell some more expensive council properties in order to partly fund those works.
Housing stock should not be static or preserved in aspic for eternity; it needs to be dynamic and responsive to the needs of the changing community it serves. Over 40% of all new housing built in Southwark in the past 2 years has been affordable housing. This reflects the growing demand we face in the borough - with 20,000 people waiting for a council home - but also underlines our commitment to ensuring that we have genuinely mixed communities across Southwark.
This is where the Policy Exchange approach goes horribly wrong. You do not need to choose between purely private or purely social housing in an area - you can have both. But you have to be imaginative and properly use your resources. We might not have affordable housing within certain premium developments in the north of the borough, but we will have new genuinely affordable council housing just a short distance away.
For 8 years when they ran Southwark Council Simon Hughes and his local Lib Dem councillors fretted and moaned about council housing in Southwark. They had no idea how they were going to fund 'decent homes' works; they had no timetable for doing those works; and delivered no new council housing for Southwark. I am proud that Labour in Southwark has a fully funded and timetabled programme to bring all our council housing up to an acceptable standard by 2016; I am proud that we are thinking about the long-term with our Housing Commission which is looking at how we retain and maintain our council housing for the next 25 years after 2016, and I am proud of our commitment to build 1000 new council homes.
Being in government, whether local or national, is about taking decisions, showing leadership and solving problems. It is too easy to sit on the sidelines like Simon Hughes and pretend that you are in opposition when you are in government; pretend you are providing leadership when you are providing none; and criticise those who provide the leadership and take the decisions which you are incapable of providing and taking.
Southwark is an exciting and optimistic borough; where our housing problems provide as many opportunities as challenges. Whilst Policy Exchange's solution isn't right for Southwark, it places the focus back on the future of council housing and building new homes for people who need them at rents they can afford. The debate it has provoked is needed now more than ever.
Firstly, the blanket policy proposed by the paper of selling-off all council properties above a certain value is flawed and would undoubtedly lead to the removal of genuinely affordable social housing from certain areas.
But the concept of making sure that your assets are used well to ensure that you are tackling the serious problem of a shortage of affordable council housing is worthy of consideration. It is one of the motivations which lies behind our proposal of accepting "in lieu" payments from developers rather than requiring them to deliver on-site "affordable housing" where that "affordable housing" is anything but. On one site in the north of Southwark a person would have had to be earning in the region of £80,000 to be able to afford the payments on the affordable housing which would have been delivered under the scheme. We think it is better to take a payment from that developer - equivalent to over £100,000 per habitable room that they should have delivered - so that we can build genuinely affordable council housing with rents closer to £100 per week.
The fund of £100 million that this will generate will deliver 1000 new council homes in Southwark - more than have been built in all of London in the last 10 years.
We have also been criticised for selling council properties where the cost of refurbishing that property for future tenants is uneconomic. This probably comes closest to the Policy Exchange proposal, but is very different from it and is really no more than a pragmatic way of partly funding our Warm, Dry and Sage 'decent homes' programme. We are committed to investing £326 million in our council housing between now and 2016 - the largest programme of any social housing landlord in the country. But we cannot pay for that just by hoping that it will be paid for! So where the proper opportunity arises we have agreed to sell some more expensive council properties in order to partly fund those works.
Housing stock should not be static or preserved in aspic for eternity; it needs to be dynamic and responsive to the needs of the changing community it serves. Over 40% of all new housing built in Southwark in the past 2 years has been affordable housing. This reflects the growing demand we face in the borough - with 20,000 people waiting for a council home - but also underlines our commitment to ensuring that we have genuinely mixed communities across Southwark.
This is where the Policy Exchange approach goes horribly wrong. You do not need to choose between purely private or purely social housing in an area - you can have both. But you have to be imaginative and properly use your resources. We might not have affordable housing within certain premium developments in the north of the borough, but we will have new genuinely affordable council housing just a short distance away.
For 8 years when they ran Southwark Council Simon Hughes and his local Lib Dem councillors fretted and moaned about council housing in Southwark. They had no idea how they were going to fund 'decent homes' works; they had no timetable for doing those works; and delivered no new council housing for Southwark. I am proud that Labour in Southwark has a fully funded and timetabled programme to bring all our council housing up to an acceptable standard by 2016; I am proud that we are thinking about the long-term with our Housing Commission which is looking at how we retain and maintain our council housing for the next 25 years after 2016, and I am proud of our commitment to build 1000 new council homes.
Being in government, whether local or national, is about taking decisions, showing leadership and solving problems. It is too easy to sit on the sidelines like Simon Hughes and pretend that you are in opposition when you are in government; pretend you are providing leadership when you are providing none; and criticise those who provide the leadership and take the decisions which you are incapable of providing and taking.
Southwark is an exciting and optimistic borough; where our housing problems provide as many opportunities as challenges. Whilst Policy Exchange's solution isn't right for Southwark, it places the focus back on the future of council housing and building new homes for people who need them at rents they can afford. The debate it has provoked is needed now more than ever.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
