Mike Tuffrey 

Over on Liberal Democrat Voice Mike Tuffrey has set out his views on policing in London:

On the streets of Tottenham, Croydon, Clapham, Hackney and Ealing, we saw what happens when adequate numbers of trained police are not deployed at the right time and in the right way.

And we heard how numbers on the streets were subsequently boosted from 3,000 to 16,000 only by drafting in back-up from neighbouring forces. In fairness, it must be said that riot control is very hazardous and officers must have the right training before they are deployed.

Yet Londoners can still be forgiven for wondering where all the police are, that they’ve been persuaded to pay for in higher council taxes.

You can read Mike’s article here.

It’s a sad fact that too much of modern politics revolves around sound-bites. David Cameron’s attempt to move his party on from Mrs Thatcher’s nostrum “no such thing as society” has swung wildly from ‘big society’ to ‘broken society’ with not much in between. Boris Johnson has at least promised to be more reflective.

For my part, this month’s riots sent me looking in my filing cabinet for the account I wrote of the Brixton riots when, back in September 1985, I was the newly-elected GLC member for Vauxhall. The police had accidentally shot Cherry Groce during a bungled house search. Long-standing community tensions erupted into a weekend of looting, followed a week later by the Broadwater Farm riot in Tottenham.

The parallels are uncanny. And what I wrote then – of wanton disorder that had no excuse, but where a partial explanation could be found in a generation lacking opportunity, feeling left out and left behind – applies today too.

Some say the answer is a law-and-order crack down, with ever tougher sentences. It is in my view a real test of Boris Johnson’s leadership whether he now slips into this traditional Tory reaction.

Others say, in an equally knee-jerk reaction, that this all proves the need for more government spending. Ken Livingston’s rhetoric about Tory cuts is ever-so reminiscent of what I heard him saying back in 1985.

It falls to the Liberal Democrats to make the case for personal responsibility AND a helping state: we recognise that public expenditure is a necessary but on its own not a sufficient condition for the sort of society where everyone can get a fair chance in life.

Lasting solutions

If we are to go beyond sound-bite responses seen from Labour and the Conservatives, there are three essential components towards lasting solutions. I base this judgement on my experience as a local government councillor and leader, as well as my years in London government.

First, the early years are crucial. Nationally the LibDem-championed pupil premium will bring additional resources to schools in the most needy areas. If coupled with effective leadership, much more parental involvement than is the norm today and the right school ethos, then in time we’ll see better outcomes. Addressing the desperate shortage of black head teachers will be crucial here as well.

In London, we need to get regional control of the large amounts spent on post-school skills, sit employers large and small down at the table, and hammer out a plan that will offer school leavers more prospect than a low wage job in some globally-branded fast food chain.

We need to challenge big firms to show the same enthusiasm they had back in the 1980s for promoting entrepreneurism. The contrast with inner city areas in the USA remains striking. There a personal get-up-and-go attitude, coupled with effective support such as the Community Reinvestment Act forcing banks to help, offers a way out for those facing disadvantage and discrimination.

It should not be left to the LibDems alone to make such obvious points about twinning responsibility with support.

Second, more and better housing. I’ve written elsewhere (link) about the crucial need to increase the number of new homes of all types. But numbers alone won’t build that sense of pride and respect which leads to having a real stake in the community.

One of the things I’m proudest of from my time as our leader in Lambeth was the number of self-managed housing estates we nurtured into existence against the odds, overcoming the dependency relationship Labour had spent years fostering.

Again, it is adequate resources coupled with real involvement that will make the difference.

Third, effective policing. Numbers are important, as I’ve set out here (link), and that means having enough money to pay for them. But just as important is how they are deployed.

We need to move forward on genuine neighbourhood policing, going beyond the ward-based SNTs and simple borough-level approaches, so all voices are really listened to, police teams including the ‘specials’ and more volunteers know their whole neighbourhoods and policing becomes truly responsive.

Law and order

All that said, Liberal Democrats are not naïve. When a small minority prefer criminality to opportunity offered, then the full weight of the law must always be applied – albeit in a way that allows people a way back (so, yes, restorative justice is part of the solution too).

We know ‘big government’ is not the answer to ‘broken society’. Equally we know do-it-yourself ‘big society’ is no substitute for effective action led by government. Liberal Democrats need to articulate with confidence why our approach offers answers to the seemingly intractable problems I first encountered on our streets a generation ago.

Over on Liberal Democrat Voice Mike Tuffrey has set out his plans for tackling unemployment in London:

Today 397,000 Londoners are unemployed and looking for a job. As a region, we have the lowest level of skills in the workforce, based on NVQ Level 1 and above. And the problems are getting worse, as we fail to recover fast enough from the cardiac arrest that Labour’s last years in office dealt to the national economy.

Not a pretty picture for our great capital city, powerhouse (so we keep saying) of the whole UK economy.

You can read Mike’s article here.

Over on Liberal Democrat Voice Mike Tuffrey has set out his plans for turning London’s public transport electric:

Rudolf Diesel has a lot to answer for. The compression engine he invented has become the great workhorse of heavy duty vehicles like the buses, taxis and vans which fill our streets. But the nasty side effect of diesel fuel is fine particulate exhaust emissions that are creating a major health crisis. Tiny particles get deep into the lungs, causing thousands of premature deaths and a big increase in ill health.

The biggest culprit in central London, where the health problems are most acute? Yes, buses, taxis and commercial vans – all run, regulated or approved by the Mayor of London.

And the single most effective solution? To switch to electricity as a fuel source and cut London’s appalling air pollution, dramatically reduce premature deaths and ill health, and – due to greater energy efficiency – help meet our climate change targets too.

You can read Mike’s article here.

Londoners face a big fares hike come January, if the Mayor sticks to his stated intention for increases way above inflation. The RPI-plus formula will add another £180 a year to a typical zone 1 to 6 commute. Ouch.

I recently challenged Boris Johnson to consult Londoners and publish a draft fares order ahead of implementation, so we can see the plans and check for stealth increases like the ones that hit outer London this year. No, he said – and told me to put it in my manifesto. Well yes Boris, I will. (Meantime take a look at the exchange here, starting at 1hr 9mins.)

Is there another way? I believe there is.

First we must make the fares package fairer. Our plan for a one hour bus ticket – hop on, hop off at no extra cost – would stop bus travellers being penalised and help the shift away from cars for short but complex local journeys. Longer term we must look at the zone map, redraw some of the concentric boundaries and bring in sub-regional zones for outer London. We should use the power of electronic ticketing to offer discounts for regular travellers who can’t afford to pay the annual season ticket up front. And what about ‘early bird’ cheaper fares that would also help spread demand and reduce overcrowding?

Second, we must ease the pressure for increases by bringing down running costs, especially the expensive Tube upgrades – vital for increased capacity but with a huge price tag. The recent McNulty report says UK rail costs between 20% and 30% more than it should. The PPP arbiter found that Transport for London spends anywhere between 15% and 70% more on signals, rolling stock and track maintenance than his benchmark of comparable European metros.

Third, we must share the costs of the upgrades with the future generations who will be benefiting from them for years to come, rather than expect today’s commuters to bear the full brunt. With borrowing through a London Bond, we could finance more of the upgrades faster, paid back from increased revenues in the years ahead. Secured on the assets, I would open the offer to ordinary Londoners who currently earn a couple of percent at best on their savings from the banks. Yet those same banks are lending out at 8% or more.

Low risk municipal bonds used to be a feature of local government finance, offering the prospect of cheaper finance and a better return for savers. And if Londoners get a less crowded and more reliable commute to work, it’s a win-win-win all round.

Mike Tuffrey has set out the campaign for the 2012 Mayoral Election that he wants to run as Lib Dem Mayoral Candidate. Posting on Liberal Democrat Voice, Mike wrote:

Ol’ blue eyes himself, Frank Sinatra, used to sing about “My kinda town…” Rest assured, I won’t be singing. But let me tell you about London – my town – and the kind of campaign I intend to run as our candidate to be Mayor of London.

The test of success in the 2012 campaign isn’t just the number of votes we win in the Mayor contest – it is how many Assembly members we get elected and how many councillors, councils and MEPs we get elected in 2014.

Our very best London-wide campaigning in the past – such as that led by our Mayor and Assembly candidates Susan Kramer, Lynne Featherstone and Caroline Pidgeon – has always been about more than winning votes London-wide; it has helped and supported local teams to win their own contests too.

This will be the 14th election I’ve fought in London, going back to my first in 1985 to the GLC. It’s the toughest yet, but winning elections in tough times is something both I and others have done in the past.

…

You can read the whole article over on Lib Dem Voice here.

Great news: the formal process of choosing our mayoral candidate is now firmly underway with the publication of the shortlist of candidates this morning.

I’m looking forward to a vigorous debate in the party about our different plans for London and the type of campaign we should fight. LibDem members tend to be independent thinkers and will make their own minds up once the case is put to them. That ‘s what makes us such a resilient party.

On this website side I’ve set out my thinking on the big issues and what needs doing for London. I’ve kicked off the contest with an email appeal for members to get in touch.

Let me know what you think. Sign up for news updates. And if you can help me get my message out, please get in touch at mike@miketuffrey.com.

Mike Tuffrey has a guest post over on Liberal Democrat Voice today, explaining how he would tackle London’s housing crisis:

Even a cursory look at the state of housing in London instantly shows that something is profoundly wrong. Rents outside the social sector are racing ahead, up 17% last year. House prices defy the laws of gravity, up 5% despite national economic trends.

And the really scandalous thing is that it has been this way under both Mayors of London, with no sign of any fundamental change. That’s why I’ve been arguing we must focus above all else on getting the supply increased. Without that, solving the affordability question gets harder and harder: ever-rising housing and land costs means ever bigger subsidies per property and fewer and fewer made available…

In short, aside from lack of mayoral drive, the missing link is the funding, which is why I’ve been so critical of the current London Mayor for not setting up the long-promised London Housing Company to capitalise on the proven interest in the City.

So when the Mayor’s own cross-party housing taskforce estimates that £35 billion of private investment is needed, I say: let’s have a Mayor of London with the ambition to make it happen.

You can read Mike Tuffrey’s housing article in full here.

Mike Tuffrey explains how green electricity should power London’s tube:

London’s biggest consumer of electricity is beneath our feet.

Literally.

In fact, London Underground is one of the top ten customers for electricity in the whole of the UK – using over one terawatt hour of electricity a year, enough to power over 250,000 homes.

You would have thought that such purchasing power would make it the obvious place to push the commissioning of new renewable electricity generation. But both current and previous mayors have dismally failed to show the ambition and determination needed.

Today, despite government and Mayoral pledges to make London greener and reduce CO2 emissions, just 16% of London Underground’s electricity supply comes from renewable and low carbon sources via the National Grid.

Most of this energy is used to power trains – although a variety of other operations need power too, such as running the 1030 groundwater pumps which keep a remarkable 30 million litres of water out of the tunnels everyday. Upgrades to the tube system also mean that demand for power keeps increasing – as the rising heat levels in Victoria Line tunnels this week confirm.

This is hardly a new idea. I have been pressing the Mayor on how the tube is powered since at least 2004. London Underground’s Environment Strategy talked about “influencing the supply chain…to improve the carbon profile of our power demands” back in 2008, and they were meant to be working up detailed plans in 2010 .

What we need to see is a step change to the use of renewables to power the tube. The Mayor’s current aspiration is for London Underground to source 30% of its energy supply from renewables by 2025. I think that’s derisory and we should go as far and as fast towards 100% as security of supply allows.

Can it be done?

The new London Array, out at sea off the coasts of Kent and Essex, will have a total capacity three times the amount the Underground needs. It’s coming on stream next year, six years after initial planning consent was granted. It shows what can be done.

London Underground themselves admit they have “strong market leverage due to the large, secure and long-term nature of demand as well as a very strong credit position, both of which are highly valued by low carbon energy generators and their financiers”.

I say let’s use that powerful position. All the scenarios show energy prices will rise in the decades ahead. It’s time to make a big move now, to secure, cost-effective, low carbon energy for London’s future.