UKPOL.CO.UK

Category: London

  • Nickie Aiken – 2023 Speech on Heritage Assets in London

    Nickie Aiken – 2023 Speech on Heritage Assets in London

    The speech made by Nickie Aiken, the Conservative MP for the Cities of London and Westminster, in the House of Commons on 23 March 2023.

    When I stood for election, I promised my constituents that I would be a strong local voice. This debate is at the heart of that promise. The Cities of London and Westminster sit in the heart of our nation’s capital. It may be considered one of a handful of global cities, but to those of us who call it home it is also a group of local villages, with local people who are incredibly proud of their neighbourhood’s history. Whether it is Covent Garden, the square mile, Marylebone, Pimlico, Hyde Park or the west end, heritage matters. Heritage matters for so many reasons, not least because of its significant pull factor for tourism. In London we see that on a magnified scale, with people coming from all over the world to visit our heritage buildings, palaces, iconic sites and parks, and enjoy our cultural offer. Places such as Buckingham Palace and Westminster Abbey will come into sharp focus later this year with the coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla. Right here, the Palace of Westminster, where we sit today, is a UNESCO world heritage site. I can therefore think of no better time for this debate, with this being English Tourism Week.

    I recognise the incredible work that my hon. Friend the Minister’s Department is doing to bolster UK tourism, especially since the pandemic. In particular, I applaud the Department’s support for heritage and the arts including, of course, the £1.57 billion culture recovery fund, and measures within the tourism recovery plan. I do so in large part because London’s unique appeal lies in its ability for its heritage assets to tell the many stories of a 2,000-year-old city.

    In London, our historic buildings are so common that it is easy for us to take them for granted without giving them a second thought, but without protection, those buildings may not be here in the future. That is made clear in Historic England’s annual at-risk register, which highlights the critical health of England’s most valued historic places. For those in the Cities of London and Westminster, such places have huge community importance, from the Buddhist temple in Margaret Street to the former Samaritan Hospital for Women in Marylebone, and the 18th-century church of St Mary Woolnoth in the City of London. Those are valued historic places, many of which, according to Historic England, are at risk of being lost.

    In 2022, London had 421 listed buildings, 101 places of worship, 25 archaeological entries, 12 parks and gardens and 72 conservation areas that were at risk of neglect, decay or inappropriate change. Thankfully, many have been rescued thanks to heritage bodies and dedicated teams of volunteers, community groups, charities, owners and local government, all working together. For example, two historic buildings with heritage value were recently under threat in the two cities, but both were saved due to community action that I was delighted to fully support. I speak of Bevis Marks synagogue—the oldest synagogue in continuous use in the United Kingdom—and the historic Simpson’s Tavern in Leadenhall, which is 250 years old and a constant in an ever-changing part of the City of London. Both were under threat, but local people stood up and said no to unfettered development, and yes to heritage.

    Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)

    I commend the hon. Lady, who I spoke to beforehand, for securing this debate. She has said not a word that I do not fully support and see the need for. She is right to say that our heritage assets are historic and need to be retained and protected, and that can happen only through funding. She also referred to tourism. Our tourism goes across the whole United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and we can all benefit. I encourage people to come to London for their holidays, and I am sure she encourages people to come to my constituency of Strangford for holidays. Whenever she comes, I suggest that she goes and visits Scrabo tower, an historic building that has been retained for two or three hundred years. It overlooks Strangford lough, and whenever I go home on the plane on a Thursday night—I usually head home then, but now it will be tomorrow morning—I see Scrabo tower and I know I am coming home, and it always does my heart good.

    Nickie Aiken

    I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. As he knows, I have visited Strangford several times and I plan to do so in the near future. It is a great and beloved place that is part of the United Kingdom.

    We cannot rely solely on community action to protect our cultural assets. There are cases where local people and local government really make an effort to ensure we look after heritage assets—we saw that with the site of Smithfield market, which has been in place since the 14th century. It is now to be the home of the Museum of London, which is moving. The development plans pay a lot of attention to preserving the historic fabric of London for future generations, and I pay tribute to that. I appreciate that not everyone is happy to lose the meat market at Smithfield, but there are cases where development can be done well to create a new offer for the next generation.

    There are also cases where people are still fighting to save their heritage. I share the concerns of Barbican residents about proposals to knock down and redevelop the former home of the Museum of London and Bastion House, and replace it with a major office development. I am delighted to work with the Barbican Association and Barbican Quarter Action to ensure local voices are heard by the City of London Corporation, and that these unique and important historic places are saved for community use, and, hopefully, housing. They are functional historic assets that serve their community and add to London’s cultural offer. That is so important, because communities want to see their local heritage thrive.

    Yes, concentrating on digital and tech is important for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, but we cannot afford to lose focus on the conservation of the country’s cultural and historic heritage. Without that emphasis, heritage will be at risk. London is modernising, but tourism figures and local support underline the popularity of the historic landscape. People care passionately about their historic environment. They want to be involved in decisions about their heritage and how we manage change.

    A good example of that recently was when constituents, as well as heritage experts and heritage bodies, wrote to me concerned that Westminster City Council was not, in their view, giving enough consideration to the historical significance of Victorian gas-powered lamps in its plans to replace them with LED replicas. There are now very few functioning gas lamps left in Westminster. Each, in its own right, is a work of art and a piece of our history, surviving the Blitz and London’s urban revolution, but not all of them will survive due to the council’s diktat to replace them with LED lamps.

    Thankfully, the brilliant London Gasketeers, a fantastic group of locals, are rallying to save these historic lamps. I met the London Gasketeers on Maunsel Street in Westminster to show my solidarity with their cause, along with many locals. Many of those local people had never been part of a campaign before and they were delighted to support the London Gasketeers. The cause gained wide-ranging support: everyone from myself to the president of the GMB union—believe it or not—historians, actors, cabbies, heritage experts and, most importantly, a diverse mix of Westminster residents who care passionately about their local heritage. We have been successful. I pay tribute to the London Gasketeers and I am delighted to see many of them in the Public Gallery this afternoon.

    Things like gas lamps might seem trivial to some, but like it or not, they are our material history. People care because Westminster’s heritage belongs to everyone. Such things matter to our overall social landscape, and are so important because London is a city where history and modernity remain intrinsically linked. The same can be said for urban development. Consider Soho, which has always been characterised by its narrow streets that lend it a friendly, human scale. That is part of Soho’s material history. However, the pavement licensing scheme, which might have been a great offer during covid as an emergency lifeline to many local restaurants and bars, could now have a detrimental effect on the historic streetscape if it becomes permanent without any protections in place. That is why I am calling on the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to ensure that guidance accompanying the Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill is clear about the conditions on which licences are granted. It is important that local councils have the flexibility to determine where it is appropriate to have a licence and where it is not.

    Beyond the principal argument on access, we need to ensure that our streetscape is consistent with Soho’s conservation area status, respecting Soho’s unique history and character. We must preserve elements of material history and evolve sensitively in places that already have protection, such as Soho’s conservation area, or deserve protection, such as Westminster’s Victorian gas lamps or London’s historic buildings and places.

    The preservation of our heritage and cultural assets draws millions of tourists to London every year. A VisitBritain survey found that the vast majority of tourists see Britain as a place where heritage meets vibrancy and modernity. The same can be said of our cultural institutions, as 15% of international tourists attend a play, musical, opera or ballet. I am incredibly proud of the vibrant arts and culture offer in my constituency, much of which can be found in the historic west end, dating back to the 1600s. In fact, according to the Office for National Statistics, 8% of the UK’s art and culture businesses are based in the Cities of London and Westminster—around 2,500 businesses.

    There is no doubt that the past few years have been extremely difficult for the arts and culture. The commercial uncertainty of the current climate has not helped. Rising global inflation and consistent train and tube strikes have all had a knock-on effect, hampering the recovery of this £2.4 billion sector. We saw during the pandemic the fragility of the industry. We cannot be complacent; we must protect our cultural assets. After all, heritage and theatre bring in £890 million a year, with more than 16 million people attending London theatres last year.

    We need to work with the theatre sector in London to develop a strong UK talent pipeline, through investment in the arts premium and development of the culture education plan. My hope is that will mean that we can make sustainable, evidence-based decisions to conserve our culture and heritage while enabling people to enjoy them. While I am on this point, although London is not part of the new levelling-up agenda per se, it forms the heartbeat of British artists and culture. We risk losing those institutions at our peril. We saw that with Arts Council England’s rash decision to cut funding to the English National Opera, based in the London Coliseum, not far from here. That decision would have seen the loss of a national icon that gave local people so much—not just world-class opera performances but local initiatives such as the ENO’s Breathe programme, which supports people suffering with long covid.

    I urge the Minister to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to the arts and culture sector, and in particular the west end. We cannot forget the strength of the sector as an entrepreneurial and SME-led economic driver locally, nationally and globally. For those reasons, I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak on the importance of protecting heritage assets in London.

    Since London’s founding in what is now the square mile in the City of London, this has been an ever-changing metropolis. Each generation has added its own personal touch, culminating in a hugely diverse and historic modern city. Now more than ever, it is our duty to ensure that we do not lose what makes London London. Therefore, we must be proactive in protecting our cultural assets, from the west end to the wider historic fabric of London, which is becoming increasingly under threat.

    I urge the Minister to reaffirm her commitment to protecting our heritage assets for future generations, and ask that she work with London’s cultural sector to stimulate growth, encourage tourism and safeguard the industry. London’s historic assets are at risk of being lost to history; we cannot allow that happen.

  • Louise Casey – 2023 Report into the Met Police (Baroness Casey of Blackstock)

    Louise Casey – 2023 Report into the Met Police (Baroness Casey of Blackstock)

    The report by Louise Casey, Baroness Casey of Blackstock, published on 21 March 2023.

    Text of report (in .pdf format)

  • Sadiq Khan – 2023 Speech on Brexit at the Mansion House

    Sadiq Khan – 2023 Speech on Brexit at the Mansion House

    The speech made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, at the Mansion House in London on 12 January 2023.

    I’d like to align myself with the Lord Mayor’s words on levelling-up… he is of course entirely correct – London both requires levelling-up and is required for levelling-up to be successful across the country.

    The Lord Mayor is already proving a tireless champion for the City of London – both here at home and across the world – and I’m looking forward to working more closely with him in future. As the Lord Mayor said, London’s diversity of thought, cultures and backgrounds has long given our city a competitive edge, as I can see looking around Mansion House this evening. As Mayor, I’m committed to harnessing the thinking and talent to deliver a better London, a city that is fairer, and more prosperous for everyone. Now we know, that neurodivergent Londoners have so much to offer our city, from innovative thinking to creative approaches. City Hall is proud to already be working closely with Neurodiversity in Business and tonight, I’m committed to making London the neurodiverse capital of the world.

    I’d also like to pay tribute to everyone from local government here with us.

    As someone who began my time in public life as a councillor, I can’t imagine a more difficult period to serve in local government.

    Terrible pressure on budgets.

    Covid.

    And now the worst cost-of-living crisis for a generation.

    You play a critical role supporting the welfare and wellbeing of our communities.

    And you don’t get anywhere near the recognition you deserve.

    So, I want to express my sincere gratitude to all the council leaders, councillors and officers here tonight from across the political spectrum – not only for continuing to deliver vital public services, but for standing up for Londoners in the most challenging of circumstances.

    My Lord Mayor, Ladies and Gentlemen, I want to use this opportunity to speak mostly about a phenomenon that occupied our TV screens, newspapers and Twitter feeds for many years.

    But which seemingly has now vanished without trace from our national political discourse.

    No, not Boris Johnson…

    But Brexit.

    Given a sizeable number of politicians seem to have taken a vow of silence on its damaging impact, I’m conscious that breaking the Brexit omerta makes me somewhat of an outlier.

    I understand the genuine apprehension many share about this issue.

    No one wants to see a return to the division and deadlock that dominated our body politic for 5 long years.

    I certainly don’t want to re-open old wounds.

    However, the inescapable truth is that this unnecessarily extreme, hard-line version of Brexit is having a detrimental effect on our capital and country – at a time when we can least afford it.

    We can’t – in all good conscience – pretend that it isn’t hurting our people and harming our businesses.

    As Mayor of this great city, choosing not to say anything would be a dereliction of duty.

    We’re gathered in one of the great financial districts in the world – supporting millions of jobs and generating billions in tax revenue – but the reality is that the City of London is being hit by a loss of trade and talent… because of Brexit.

    So, my message is this:

    Trying to will Brexit into a success, or simply ignoring its impact, is not a strategy that will deliver prosperity for London or a brighter future for Britain.

    If we’re not honest about this problem we cannot ever hope to fix it.

    Raising Brexit this evening is not about trying to make a partisan point.

    Or just a chance to moan about the past.

    What I’m interested in is the future – doing what we all know is right for London – and looking at how we can sensibly and maturely mitigate the damage that’s being inflicted.

    Let me share three short examples: First, our national economy.

    We’re facing an economic downturn.

    Yes, we’re not alone – the economies of the US, EU and China are all forecast to contract – but the UK is predicted to face the worst recession and weakest recovery in the G7.

    In fact, UK GDP is set to shrink by 1 per cent this year, compared to 0.1 per cent for the eurozone.

    What makes us exceptional?

    Well, Brexit has already reduced our GDP by 5.5 per cent…

    It’s reduced investment by 11 per cent…

    And reduced goods and services trade by 7 per cent.

    The hard mainstream? Brexit we have is a drag on growth, investment and trade.

    Fixing it would mean the recession would be less painful and less prolonged.

    This is what businesses are telling me across our city – and I have a responsibility as Mayor to speak up on their behalf.

    Second, the cost-of-living emergency…

    The London School of Economics found that Britons are paying an extra 6 billion pounds to eat because of Brexit.

    That’s 210 pounds added to the average household’s supermarket bill over a two-year period.

    Food inflation is now running at more than 13 per cent and its poorer families – who spend a higher proportion of their income on groceries – who are being hit the hardest.

    A Brexit tax on life’s essentials is the last thing they need right now.

    So, putting right the wrongs of Brexit would mean we can ease the pain on those less able to shoulder the burden.

    Third, our public services…

    Many are now in a desperate state, most acutely our NHS and I want to pay tribute to all of those who work in our national health service.

    The estimated cost to the Treasury in lost tax revenues due to Brexit is 40 billion pounds.

    With more than one million Londoners currently waiting for treatment…

    With nurses on strike for the first time in history… and doctors, paramedics, 999 call handlers, physiotherapists soon to join them..

    With patients needlessly dying because of unprecedented delays…

    We simply cannot forgo 40 billion pounds of potential investment in our health service.

    So, repairing our relationship with Europe would mean we can better support our NHS.

    After two years of denial and avoidance, we must now confront the hard truth:

    Brexit isn’t working.

    It’s weakened our economy…

    Fractured our Union…

    And diminished our reputation…

    But crucially… not beyond repair.

    A New Year brings new opportunities.

    And political leaders must now seize the opportunity, and with renewed purpose set out the need to reform our relationship with Europe.

    Not with a return to the interminable Brexit wars of the past.

    But with a sincere, considered, civil debate about Britain’s future that has at its core a clear-eyed view of the national interest.

    Let me be clear:

    We need greater alignment with our European neighbours – a shift from this extreme, hard Brexit we have now to a workable, softer version that serves our economy and people.

    That includes having a pragmatic debate about the benefits of re-joining the Customs Union and the Single Market.

    If the government wants to get the ball rolling on fixing Brexit, the perfect place to start in London would be addressing our labour and skills shortage.

    The number of businesses in our city experiencing at least one skills shortage has now risen to almost 7 in 10.

    Meanwhile, the number of jobs in our city held by EU-born workers has fallen by over 80,000 – putting huge strain on crucial sectors such as hospitality and construction.

    Devolving powers to London and allowing us to create a regional shortage occupation list would be one way to give businesses the ability to attract and retain talent in the areas they need it most.

    But another option would be a fundamental rethink of the existing Brexit deal.

    Securing a better Brexit would mean more trade, higher investment and stronger growth.

    It would mean a boost to both exports and living standards.

    It’s key to unlocking London’s full potential and, in turn, helping us to power the national recovery.

    More broadly, the government needs to entrust communities with the power to control their destiny.

    Devolution improves our economy and politics.

    Even in the face of huge challenges, we’ve shown what can be achieved from City Hall…

    We’re building more council homes than at any time since the 1970s.

    We’re taking huge strides to clean up London’s toxic air.

    We’re offering free skills training to anyone who’s unemployed or in low-paid work.

    We’ve delivered the Elizabeth Line and much, much more.

    But fixing Brexit will mean we can accelerate our efforts to build a better London for everyone – moving faster to achieve a city that is safer, fairer, greener and more prosperous for all.

    Let me just end by saying this:

    While it’s true that the twin nightmares of the pandemic and Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine continue to cause great harm, we cannot continue to hide under the covers from the damage being done by Brexit.

    We are no longer in 2016 or 2019.

    The landscape has shifted.

    More and more Londoners are worried about the impact of Brexit on our city.

    Our business community is increasingly speaking out and in growing numbers.

    It’s time the government caught up.

    Ministers seem to have developed selective amnesia when it comes to one of the root causes of our problems.

    Brexit can’t be airbrushed out of history, or the consequences wished away.

    Europe was, is and will remain our most important relationship, but it’s in desperate and urgent need of repair.

    So, let 2023 be the year we summon up the political courage to rebuild those essential bridges and tear down those needless walls standing in the way of our businesses and our people.

    The future prosperity of our capital and country depends upon it.

    Thank you.

    Finally, can I ask everyone to join me in raising a glass… to the Lord Mayor and the Lady Mayoress.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2023 Statement after Three Years of UK Leaving the European Union

    Sadiq Khan – 2023 Statement after Three Years of UK Leaving the European Union

    The statement made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 31 January 2023.

    Three years on from leaving the European Union, we must all now face the inescapable truth: that this unnecessarily hard-line version of Brexit is having a detrimental effect on the London and UK economy – at a time when we can least afford it.

    While Whitehall has taken a vow of silence on the damage Brexit is causing, businesses across the country are drowning under the weight of increased bureaucracy, staffing shortages and supply chain challenges. London is being hit hard by the loss of trade and talent to our global competitors.

    It is time to abandon the hostile mentality of the referendum years and open a dialogue with our European neighbours about greater alignment.

  • Fleur Anderson – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Energy Costs for Post Offices

    Fleur Anderson – 2023 Parliamentary Question on Energy Costs for Post Offices

    The parliamentary question asked by Fleur Anderson, the Labour MP for Putney, in the House of Commons on 9 January 2023.

    Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)

    The delay in this statement has already left several businesses in Putney to go under. I am now concerned about the post office in Southfields, where the sub-postmistress thinks they will be unable to continue operating. There will be a community cost if post offices across the country go under as a result of the increase in bills. Has the Minister assessed the impact of the energy crisis on post offices? Can he confirm whether they will be included in the cut-back scheme after March? Could he consider a community impact criteria in the scheme so that there will not be a high cost for our communities in Southfields and beyond?

    James Cartlidge

    On the point of going under as a result of the delayed announcement of the results of the review, we were due to announce on the last sitting day before recess, and we have announced on the first sitting day—it is a delay, but not a huge one. In that time, those businesses, whatever they are, will have been benefiting from the current support running until the end of March. We have now given them certainty for the next 12 months with a scheme that remains generous and universal. It is not as generous as before but I can confirm that it will include the sub-post office.

  • Gordon Brown – 2003 Speech at the Future Wealth of Nations Conference

    Gordon Brown – 2003 Speech at the Future Wealth of Nations Conference

    The speech made by Gordon Brown, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, at Canary Wharf in London on 4 March 2003.

    It is a great pleasure to be here in Tower Hamlets today and to congratulate all of you – your MP, councillors, businessmen and women, local community organisations – on your success in the last six years since the New Deal was created of reducing unemployment in this area from over 6,700 unemployed to 4700 – a cut of nearly 30 per cent.

    With youth unemployment down from over 900 to 300 – a cut of over 65 per cent.

    If only one person had found a job that would be good…but you have working together, found jobs for nearly 2,000.

    And I know you are and should be particularly proud not just of what you are achieving in employment now, but in education for the future where you’ve seen the greatest increase in educational achievement of any borough in the country – and I’d like to add my congratulations to pupils, parents, teachers and everyone involved on this great success. In particular I want to thank all the headteachers here today for the dedication you show and the difference you make to the lives of the children in this borough.

    I am delighted to be here this morning and I’d like to begin by thanking Oona for organising today’s conference.

    Over the last 6 years as Member of Parliament for Bethnal Green and Bow, Oona has made a real difference to the lives of people here in the East End, fighting their corner when there are problems, celebrating their successes and working hard to highlight the real opportunities this area offers.

    Oona’s reputation both in Parliament and across government for speaking up on behalf of her constituents is renowned.

    And if she lobbies businesses in Canary Wharf as hard as she lobbies me in the Treasury, many of you here today have my sympathy!

    Oona is a tireless advocate for her constituents, and today is testament to the hard work she has put in to broker partnerships between business, the voluntary sector and local people.

    Because we know that many problems once addressed only by the state gaining more power can be solved today only by the state giving much of its power back to the people. The Government is determined to do more to build, strengthen and extend the links between the public, private and voluntary sectors – and we can already see the results of these partnerships here in Tower Hamlets:

    The local Employment Zone and Action Team – equipping people with the skills they need to move into the jobs that are available both in the City and beyond
    The East London Health Action Zone where business men and women act as mentors to local GPs
    The Ocean Estate and Weavers and Spitalfields Sure Start projects providing access to health, education and childcare services for nearly 2,500 under 4s

    The New Deal for Communities and local Neighbourhood Renewal Strategies which are helping turn round your poorest neighbourhoods
    And the “Idea Store” which is combining a traditional library with an innovative new learning centre and computer facilities.
    All these projects showing how, for the first time, public services can not only involve private, voluntary and charitable organisations, but can be run through and by them – not implementing a standardised central plan, but reflecting the needs of local communities and families.

    The private sector is already playing a key role in many of these projects and it is a privilege to be here to recognise the contribution that many of the companies represented here today, as well as many others, are making not just to the strength of the British economy but also to the strength and vitality of British society – as your support for community regeneration, employee volunteering, mentoring and so many other initiatives in our community shows.

    And as you expand and advance an enterprising economy in our country you hold the key to our economic prosperity.

    But you are here today because you believe that business also has a responsibility to play a role not just in the traditional marketplaces of our country but in the real life neighbourhoods and communities in which you find your employees and your customers.

    And that is what this conference is all about – how corporate self interest and corporate social responsibility are not irreconcilable opposites but can move forward in unison.

    And what is fascinating as you survey the changes over recent decades – as global communication and global competition has intensified – is the progress that has been made as our shared understanding of corporate social responsibility has developed and deepened.

    An initiative that began by focusing primarily on businesses giving money away is now widened to include issues of how companies make money.

    And in this modern era, issues of staff morale and motivation, brand loyalty and reputational risk, and environmental sustainability are now also widely recognised as key drivers of competitive advantage.

    So as corporate social responsibility has come to mean not just charity or philanthropy but also greater transparency, environmental care and direct engagement in communities – we have seen British companies lead the world in the advancement of corporate social responsibility as it has moved from the margins to the mainstream, from the arena of charity to the arena of corporate strategy.

    Corporate social responsibility broadening all the time into a belief that economic, social and environmental objectives can be pursued together and in harmony.

    It is a recognition that trust is critical to success; that reputation management is essential; that a brand must enjoy people’s confidence.

    It is a recognition that when business loses trust and then legitimacy – either through lack of transparency or social engagement or corporate irresponsibility, whether it be Enron or Worldcom – it is at its most vulnerable.

    And it is a recognition that social responsibility is no longer an optional extra but a necessity; not a part of the business of a company but at its heart; not a sideshow but a centrepiece; not incidental but integral to what you do — a smart strategy for modern business.

    And businesses up and down the country are already demonstrating that they understand that corporate self interest and corporate social responsibility – the good economy and the good society – advance together:

    Businesses making its equipment available to the disabled, developing new technologies in doing so as they give special help to a vulnerable group

    Companies setting up in deprived areas, recruiting the local unemployed and at one and the same time creating profitable local enterprises and bringing the out of work back into work

    Firms sending trainee workers to help out in local charitable or community organisations helping poor communities and gaining training opportunities for their employees

    Banks providing basic accounts for people previously financially excluded and thereby tapping new markets and creating a culture of saving amongst low income families.

    And so many of you here today are already making a huge contribution.

    But now is the time to look at what more can be done, to scale up your activities, share best practice, and make even more of a difference.

    And with a new understanding of the changing role of business in the community, governments are also challenged to leave behind the old ideas that see the achievement of a more dynamic market economy and a fair society as somehow mutually exclusive.

    For fifty years Britain was bedevilled by the sterile and self defeating argument that there was a fundamental choice to be made between promoting a dynamic economy and creating a fairer society. That enterprise is bought only at the cost of fairness and fairness only at the price of enterprise.

    But whether it is by tapping the potential of all through equality of educational opportunity, or through recognizing, our responsibilities to the environment for the next generation, or through companies engaging in the community in which they operate, people now see that enterprise and fairness can advance together. And I believe the challenge in our generation is to build a consensus in our country that stretches from the poorest to the richest community, from left to right of the political spectrum, that instead of enterprise at the cost of fairness or fairness at the cost of enterprise, Britain can lead the way in showing the world that enterprise and fairness move forward together.

    And all this demands that government too must change the way we do things and, in changing our ways, face up to our responsibilities.

    That is why we will continue to make the tax system the best in the world for encouraging individual and corporate giving, including extending the 10 per cent supplement on payroll giving donations until 2004.

    Why we are working with business and the voluntary sector to develop a package of measures to encourage more employees to give both time and money to charity through the “Corporate Challenge”.

    And why in high unemployment communities like Tower Hamlets we are now working together for economic renewal – creating new incentives to promote greater business activity.

    In the last six years the number of businesses in Tower Hamlets has risen from 6,800 to 8,700 – an increase of nearly 2,000 businesses in this area alone – but we can still do more.

    If in the best off neighbourhoods there are 50 small businesses creating jobs but in the poorest areas only 4 or 5, then there are less jobs, reduced income for services, and yet because of unemployment more social problems that public services need to fund. So we are agreed that one of the best anti poverty, pro jobs programmes is to encourage more businesses to start up and grow especially in areas of greatest poverty.

    I believe we should see inner-city areas not as no-go areas for business or simply “problem” areas but as areas of opportunity: new markets where businesses can thrive because of the competitive advantages they often offer – with strategic locations, untapped resources, a high density of local purchasing power and the potential of their workforce.

    So to remove the barriers preventing firms from starting up and growing in our most deprived communities, we have designated 2000 new enterprise areas – 18 of these in Tower Hamlets – where we encourage economic activity by cutting the cost of starting up, investing, employing, training, managing the payroll.

    And with the new Community Investment Tax Credit giving new incentives for business investment in those areas – and new charity guidelines now defining economic regeneration as eligible for charitable status – I hope that working together we can bring investment, jobs and prosperity to areas that prosperity has by-passed.

    But if we are to have the deeper and wider entrepreneurial culture we want, we need not just greater incentives for business activity in deprived areas but more businesses to become involved in our schools and colleges – one of the key themes of today’s conference.

    Currently only 30 per cent – and in many areas as few as 15 per cent – of young people gain any experience of enterprise.

    And it is crucial that we act now to equip our children with the enterprising skills and experience to go out into this fast changing world, whatever career paths they choose.

    In Britain we have many world class businesses but productivity growth still lags behind many of our competitors and the number of business start ups remains low with half the proportion of people in the UK actively considering starting a new business compared to the United States.

    Whereas enterprise in the US is seen as an exciting career option for young people, it doesn’t appear so glamorous in the UK and I want to turn this perception around.

    I want every young person to hear about, and experience, the world of business; every college to be aware of the opportunities in business, even to start a business; and every teacher to be able to communicate the virtues of business and enterprise.

    I want businessmen and women going into schools helping to provide enterprise activities; I want every student to have a quality experience of enterprise and contact with business before they leave school; I want every community to see business leaders as role models for their children.

    Our ambition is to raise the aspirations of all our children and then show how these aspirations can be realised.

    That is why the government is implementing the recommendations of the Review of Enterprise and Education led by Howard Davies – investing £75 million over the next three years so that, by 2006, all pupils will have at least 5 days of enterprise education before leaving school.

    But we simply cannot make progress without the active involvement of the business community itself.

    There are already many examples of City and Canary Wharf companies that have established trailblazing partnerships with schools in Tower Hamlets – sending employees into schools to provide classroom support, giving pupils the opportunity to undertake work experience or visit factories and operational sites, being mentors and career counsellors to young people or serving as business governors.

    Later this morning Mulberry School will be highlighting their partnership with the Bank of America but I could equally mention the contributions of Unilever, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers, to name just a few.

    When I was at school the world of education was far too remote from the world of business but thanks to the activities of many of the companies here today, this is changing for the better.

    But I believe that we can still do more and so I am urging all of you here today to forge links and partnerships with schools and colleges in Tower Hamlets and beyond.

    In this way every business in the country will be helping to forge the new enterprise culture that we want to see, tapping the immense skill and entrepreneurial talent that exists in Britain to the benefit of us all – corporate social responsibility not just about “doing the right thing” but a core part of improving our competitive edge.

    Now we have many demands on our resources and energies as a government.

    And I make no apology for saying we will spend what it takes to prevent the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons by states that defy the international community and to advance the cause of disarmament. Last year I set aside one billion pounds to be drawn upon by the ministry of defence for security and military preparations, if and when it became necessary. Last month I set aside an additional £750 million. Our armed forces do an outstanding job for Britain and today I make clear our gratitude for the work that they do and my resolve to ensure our armed forces are properly supported for whatever lies ahead. The international community must not stand by whilst a regime that proliferates weapons of mass destruction defies more than a decade of international agreements.

    But while we discharge our international responsibilities we will also discharge our domestic responsibilities.

    And my duty is to those areas and communities of this country which for too long had suffered high unemployment and high levels of deprivation who will have the resources through the new deal and our community regeneration budgets that are necessary. It is around regeneration and how we deliver it that this conference will discuss and debate today. And I believe with its breadth of participation from business and the community this conference shows there is a will to work together to create a Britain where just as employment is open to all, enterprise is open to all – a Britain with a creative, innovative and enterprising economy in every area of our country.

    Just as Britain works best when Britain works together so – as Oona’s initiative shows – Tower Hamlets works best when Tower Hamlets works together.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2022 Statement Following Death of Second Person in Brixton

    Sadiq Khan – 2022 Statement Following Death of Second Person in Brixton

    The statement made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 19 December 2022.

    I am devastated by the death of Gaby Hutchinson, the second life to tragically be lost following the appalling events on Thursday night in Brixton.

    On behalf of all Londoners, I would like to extend my heartfelt condolences to his family and loved ones at this extremely difficult time.

    Gaby, like Rebecca Ikumelo, had his whole life ahead of him and had every right to come home safe and well after his shift, working at Brixton Academy.

    My thoughts remain with everyone affected by this dreadful incident. The urgent investigation into what happened continues and I urge anyone with information or footage from the incident to submit this to investigators via the public portal that has been set up by the police. You can also submit information and footage to police anonymously via Crimestoppers online or by calling 0800-555-111.

    City Hall are in close contact with the venue and authorities across London about working to ensure nothing like this happens again and I won’t rest until we have the answers all those impacted by the tragic Brixton incident need and deserve.

  • Sadiq Khan – 2022 Statement on Zara Aleena

    Sadiq Khan – 2022 Statement on Zara Aleena

    The statement made by Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, on 14 December 2022.

    Can I begin by expressing my deepest sympathies to Zara’s loved ones, by paying tribute to their strength and resolve, and by thanking her family for asking me to make this statement today.

    They have suffered a trauma no one should ever be forced to endure.

    How many of us can say that we too would’ve carried ourselves with the same grace and dignity in the face of such unbearable pain?

    Today, yet another violent man has been sentenced for the horrific killing of yet another innocent woman.

    Zara Aleena’s future was stolen by someone with no regard for her life or the laws of our land she spent her days working to uphold.

    We don’t know what motivated this terrible and senseless act of violence, but we know the cost:

    A young, bright woman’s hopes will never be realised.

    Her family and friends’ lives forever altered.

    And more and more women feeling less safe as they go about their daily lives.

    Zara’s loss is a tragedy in every sense.

    For her family, friends and community who are left bereft.

    And for our city, which is deprived of a talented and dedicated public servant.

    I’m acutely aware of the question being asked across our city right now…

    after Bibaa and Nicole…

    after Sarah…

    after Sabina…

    after Zara…

    and after the many other women whose lives have been brutally cut short at the hands of men…

    when is this going to end?

    There is an epidemic of violence against women and girls.

    In the UK, a man kills a woman every three days.

    As Mayor, I’m determined to break this sickening cycle of violence, condemnation and inaction.

    Because women don’t just deserve to be safe – they have the right to be safe.

    We’ve made tackling violence against women and girls a priority in London, with new initiatives and investment.

    But I know it isn’t enough… we wouldn’t be here if it was.

    Our city – and our society – must change.

    And I’m determined to work with partners to do everything we can to lead the way.

    My promise to Zara’s loved ones, to women and to all Londoners is that as Mayor, City Hall stands with you.

    And we will not rest until our city becomes a place where no woman or girl ever fears for their safety in their home or on our streets.

    Thank you.

  • Richard Holden – 2022 Speech on the Expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone

    Richard Holden – 2022 Speech on the Expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone

    The speech made by Richard Holden, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport, in Westminster Hall, the House of Commons, on 20 December 2022.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Hosie. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford (Gareth Johnson) on securing the debate. On ultra low emissions, we heard quite a few emissions from the hon. Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane), but I am not sure that any of them were really relevant to the broader debate. He seemed to praise the Mayor of Greater Manchester for what he is up to. The Mayor stopped his ULEZ. I not sure that the Leader of the Opposition and the hon. Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East are on the same page regarding the Mayor of Greater Manchester, given the Leader of the Opposition’s recent jokes at the Mayor’s expense.

    The need to tackle air pollution is something on which I hope that Members on both sides of the House—and indeed the Government and the Mayor of London—agree, to answer the question from the hon. Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson). Air pollution is a big environmental risk to human health, and the Government are determined to tackle it. As my hon. Friend the Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French) said, that is why we have invested more than £800 million to tackle air pollution in 64 local council areas. Much more can be done, although we can be proud that air pollution has reduced significantly since 2010, with emissions of particulate matter down by 18% and nitrogen oxides down by 44%, to their lowest level since records began.

    As my hon. Friend the Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon) made very clear in a tour de force speech, ULEZ will have only a minor or negligible impact, as the Jacobs report has said. My hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer) put forward various sensible solutions. My hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds) also reflected some of the issues, particularly around accessibility of public transport. As my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford said, the expansion to the London boundary was not in the Mayor’s manifesto—a point reflected by my hon. Friends the Members for Sutton and Cheam (Paul Scully), for Orpington, and for Watford (Dean Russell). It was against the Mayor’s manifesto and against his own consultation. Those are not political points, as some Opposition Members would like to suggest; they are facts, eloquently put forward by hon. Members.

    David Simmonds

    I commend the Minister on the work that he has been doing on buses. Does he agree that the fact that the Labour group in Hillingdon Council supports the Conservatives’ campaign against ULEZ is evidence that this is not a matter of party politics but one of people putting their constituents and residents first?

    Mr Holden

    I thank my hon. Friend for that point. It was interesting to hear from the hon. Member for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), who is not in the Chamber at the moment. She seemed to be on a slightly different page from some of the other Labour Whips’ remarks from the other hon. Members present.

    Many hon. Members have spoken clearly and eloquently about the anger that their constituents feel about what is going on. I hope that the Mayor, the Labour party in London, the Lib Dems and the Greens hear that too. The Mayor of London, however, needs no agreement from the Government to pursue his proposed expansion of ULEZ. He is doing so using powers granted to him under section 295 and schedule 23 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 to implement any road schemes that charge users within greater London. He has previously used those powers to introduce the congestion charge, the low emission zone, and the current ultra low emission zone. While he has notified my Department of his intention, he is not obliged to consult us. As hon. Members will also be aware, the Department for Transport will not provide any of the £250 million that the scheme needs in order to be set up.

    I thank my hon. Friends the Members for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), for Mid Sussex (Mims Davies) and for Bromley and Chislehurst (Sir Robert Neill), my right hon. Friends the Members for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Sir David Evennett) and for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling), and other hon. Members from across the south-east of England who have also made representations to me on this matter, and who met with me recently. Sadly, the Government do not have the power to veto the Mayor’s decision. There has been some suggestion that the Secretary of State has powers under section 143 of the GLA Act to block the measure.

    Geraint Davies

    The Minister will know that it is the 10-year anniversary of the death of Ella Kissi-Debrah, who was the first person to have air pollution listed as the cause of death on her death certificate. Will he support the Clean Air (Human Rights) Bill that went through the Lords completely, with the support of Conservatives, and its ambition to introduce World Health Organisation air quality standards, ideally by 2030?

    Mr Holden

    As I have said to the hon. Gentleman, we have already made substantial progress in that area. On the specifics of any legislation, I will write to him.

    I have been advised by my officials in the strongest terms that section 143 of the GLA Act is focused on correcting inconsistencies between national policy and the Mayor’s transport strategy. It is not intended to be used to block specific measures that the Mayor would like to introduce under the devolution settlement.

    Hon. Members raised two specific issues about councils and their land and about council consent and the environment. I will write to Members on those issues, as well as the other issues that they raised with me recently. In fact, I will write to Members across the House in the coming days.

    I understand the concerns of hon. Members. Estimates show that approximately 160,000 cars and 42,000 vans that use London’s roads would be liable for the £12.50 ULEZ charge on an average day—approximately 8% of cars and 18% of journeys. But it is not just about the charge of around £1 million a day, as hon. Members have said. It is also about the fines, as my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford said.

    In spite of the hundreds of millions of pounds that it is proposed will be raised annually, the Mayor has announced a new £110 million pound scrappage scheme to help certain Londoners prepare for expansion. The scheme will launch at the end of next month, but it will be open only to certain residents and to Londoners, not those from outside London who are affected and travel in every day, including 50% of people who work in blue light services. They will not be touched by that scheme at all. Moreover, it will only be for those on specific benefits, including universal credit. There will be no help at all for the majority of Londoners affected, with many small and medium-sized businesses, as my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam said, left to bear that heavy burden alone.

    As the hon. Member for Putney quoted from the FSB report, I will cite it as well. For businesses that do not currently comply with the zone, 25% said that they will immediately pass any increase on to customers directly, creating further inflationary pressure, and 18% of firms—almost one in five—said that they would close their business. That is from a Federation of Small Businesses press release today.

    Fleur Anderson

    The Federation of Small Businesses has asked the Government to deal with this by topping up the scrappage scheme. Will the Minister consider topping up the scrappage scheme to help more people, as he has outlined?

    Mr Holden

    It is interesting that the Labour party would like the Government to fund that out of general taxation. I suggest that the Mayor of London should look at that. If it is his policy, he should seek to fund it.

    Mike Kane

    No leadership!

    Mr Holden

    There is certainly no leadership from the Mayor of London, as we can see from all the hon. Members here, and there is certainly no leadership from the Lib Dems, who were too scared to turn up to this debate. I think the hon. Gentleman and I can agree on that.

    My hon. Friend the Member for Carshalton and Wallington made a really important point about grace periods, because the exemptions are very limited. Points were also made by the hon. Members for East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow (Dr Cameron) and for Feltham and Heston (Seema Malhotra), and by my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Dean Russell), who spoke passionately about charities. Grace periods will be extended for disabled and disabled passenger vehicles as well as wheelchair-accessible private hire vehicles. Those categories will be exempt only until October 2027. Minibuses used for community transport, the charities my hon. Friend spoke about, will be exempt only until October 2025. Some of those charities are in outer London and many work across the south-east—they will not even be able to apply for the scrappage scheme.

    In addition, NHS patients may be eligible to claim back under the Mayor’s plans, but only if they are clinically assessed as too ill to travel to an appointment on public transport. It is not about whether the transport is available, but about whether they are too ill to travel on it. My hon. Friend the Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner made the really good point that it is not available at all in many parts of outer London. As he said, the choice just is not there for many of his constituents, and it is not there for many other Members’ constituents, either.

    Currently, emergency vehicles are exempt from ULEZ and LEZ charges. However, the sunset period lasts only until October 2023, which is months away. Has an assessment been made of the impact on London services, including the ambulance service, the Metropolitan Police Service and the fire service? It will be interesting to see that, if there is one. There will also be an impact on the council tax bills of Londoners.

    Several Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for Dartford, asked questions about the Mayor’s authority. Specifically, they are concerned that the Mayor may apply ULEZ charges to motor vehicles that are current under the scheme today, such as compliant petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles.

    Geraint Davies

    Will the Minister give way?

    Mr Holden

    I am sorry, but I will make further progress.

    I reassure Members that if that were to occur, the Government would explore what more could be done and consider whether the Mayor was using his authority properly and fairly, without detriment to even more people. It is clear that the Mayor is prepared to go well beyond any pledges or manifesto he was elected on in order to pursue his own objectives.

    The hon. Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East made an interesting point about there being no Government support for TfL or transport. He needs to look at the amount of support that the Government provide to the Labour Mayor of London. We understand that the pressure on Transport for London has been huge. Before covid, 70% of TfL’s revenue came from passenger fares, but passenger journeys reduced by as much as 95%. Fare income has recovered, but it is still less than nine tenths of what it was previously.

    The TfL long-term funding settlement of 30 August provided TfL with £1.2 billion until the end of March 2024. That takes total Government funding of TfL to more than £6 billion since the beginning of the pandemic, or £650 for every Londoner. What has the Mayor done with the money? The £1.2 billion matches the Mayor’s own pre-pandemic spending. It will ensure that London’s transport network remains protected against potential lost revenue and the uncertainty of post-pandemic demand. Furthermore, it will enable the delivery of a number of projects set to revolutionise travel across London, including supporting £3.6 billion-worth of critical infrastructure projects, which will benefit not just London but the wider economy.

    The Government have supported and helped passengers to benefit from major upgrades to our world-class transport network, including the Elizabeth line, which opened recently. The settlement also requires the Mayor and TfL to control their operating costs and to continue to progress initiatives to modernise, reform and become more efficient. We have been clear that the Mayor needs to put TfL on to a financially sustainable footing. In no way, however, does that require ULEZ expansion. That is clear. Taxpayers across the UK have had to support TfL continually. It is imperative that they get a fair deal.

    The purpose of devolution is that decisions are taken by elected local politicians, not in this House or in Whitehall. Labour, the Lib Dems and the Greens need to know that political decisions have political consequences, and that there are political solutions to them. Were I the Mayor of London, I would not be going down the path he has chosen—but I am not. If Londoners do not like the decisions that he has taken, they will have the opportunity to have their say in 2024. In their local elections, I am sure that hon. Members will make it clear about the Mayor of London’s policies.

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dartmouth for bringing this matter to the attention of the Government. I thank hon. Members from all across the south-east for their ongoing work, and I will continue to use my role in Government to work with them. As I said, in the coming days I will write to all hon. Members across London and the south-east on the important questions asked not only in the debate, but in other recent meetings and by Members who have approached me. I also assure Members that, across Government, we will continue to ensure that the Mayor of London is held accountable for his decisions in our capital city.

    Gareth Johnson

    Briefly, I thank all hon. Members for their contributions to what has been a productive and constructive debate. I am grateful to the Minister for his efforts in challenging this whole policy of the London Mayor. No one disputes the fact that we need clean air. In Dartford, we have very poor air. Frankly, however, that is a mask used by the Mayor of London to increase taxation. It is about raising money. It just so happens that it raises hundreds of millions of pounds for him. And it just so happens that he has a black hole in his finances and wants to bring in a broader charge, taxing every motor vehicle. This is about money and not about pollution.

    I feel sick to my stomach that people who cannot vote out the Mayor of London—such as Dartfordians—cannot do a thing about this. That is not right or fair. The whole thing should be stopped, but I hear what the Minister says about his inability to do so. It is the most unfair situation that I can recall ever being put into.

  • Mike Kane – 2022 Speech on the Expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone

    Mike Kane – 2022 Speech on the Expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone

    The speech made by Mike Kane, the Labour MP for Wythenshawe and Sale East, in Westminster Hall, the House of Commons, on 20 December 2022.

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Hosie. I, too, congratulate the hon. Member for Dartford (Gareth Johnson) on securing the debate.

    I am going to scrap my speech for a second. One of the great honours of living in London for part of the week is understanding how absolutely fantastic the public transport system is. If you try to get back to Manchester today on an Avanti train, Godspeed to you all. If you have tried to get across the Pennines over the last few months, Godspeed to you all. I have had the great honour in my nearly nine years as an MP to spend one day a month walking in London. I have done the London loop, so unfortunately I have walked through most of the places represented by the hon. Members present, including Orpington, Petts Wood, Ruislip, Wallington and Watford. What a beautiful place London is. I am still astonished by the quality of the public transport system, which is second to none on this planet and the envy of everybody outside this great conurbation.

    Every year, 4,000 Londoners die prematurely due to poisonous air, and the greatest number of deaths are in outer London boroughs, with 11 Londoners dying prematurely every day. Air pollution is quite simply a matter of life and death; it makes our communities sick. Despite the Government’s promise that there would be no weakening of environmental targets post Brexit, it seems that they are refusing to match the EU standards, setting a weaker target while sentencing our children and communities to an unnecessary 10 years of toxic air.

    The challenge is threefold: we must tackle toxic air pollution, we must deal with the climate emergency, and we must deal with traffic congestion. I was at the Sutton Ecology Centre at the weekend, and I saw just how congested the A232 is and the problems there.

    Elliot Colburn

    Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the A232 is only congested because the Mayor of London has scrapped the A232 review that he promised to do?

    Mike Kane

    The A232 is actually congested because there are too many vehicles on it—that is what congestion is. London is a beautiful town, so I do not know why we allow it to happen. It is incredible to me.

    The Government’s own watchdog, the Office for Environmental Protection, says that the Government have failed to announce new targets, as they should have done under the Environment Act 2021, and that the new Government air quality targets are too weak and will condemn another generation to poor air.

    We know that around 85% of vehicles driving in outer London already meet the pollution standards. Mayor Khan has introduced the biggest scrappage scheme yet: £110 million in support for Londoners on low incomes, disabled Londoners, micro-businesses and charities to scrap or retrofit their non-compliant vehicles. He has extended the exemption period for them and for community transport. As the hon. Member for Orpington (Gareth Bacon) said, the scheme was devised under the last Mayor of London, but it has taken Mayor Khan to implement it.

    As was already pointed out, the Mayor also announced plans to add an extra 1 million kilometres to the bus network—much of that in outer London. Again, that requires leadership and support from central Government. The Government’s clean air fund excludes applications from London boroughs and the Greater London Authority. London’s share would amount to around £42 million, which would have gone a long way to expanding or supporting the Mayor’s £110 million scrappage fund.

    I am a Greater Manchester MP. We have had problems. There are nitrogen dioxide sewers—controlled by Highways England—going through my constituency. If those roads were factories, they would have been shut down. They are simply not acceptable in this day and age. Local authorities were given a legal direction to clean up the air by 2024, and like Birmingham, Bradford and Portsmouth, they had to act, but Ministers have comprehensively failed to provide the necessary funding. Ministers need to help families and small businesses switch to electric vehicles, and they must take action to expand charging infrastructure. Plumbers who use their vans for work are being priced out of this revolution. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Putney (Fleur Anderson) for having two brothers who are plumbers—wouldn’t we all want that?

    This week, we learned that instead of charging ahead, the Government are slipping back on the charging infrastructure strategy. Rapid charging fund trials have been delayed, changes to planning rules have been kicked into the long grass, and take-up of the on-street charging scheme is anaemic. Labour’s plan for green growth will drive jobs, tackle the cost of living and help to clean up toxic air. There will be help for families with the cost of switching to electric vehicles, and we will provide the action we need to tackle toxic air. Britain is the only country in the developed world where private bus operators set routes and fares with no say from the public. That is not the case in London, but it is for bus services outside London. I was delighted to see the work that Andy Burnham has done as Mayor of Greater Manchester in setting the £2 fares, which the Government are now copying.

    I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Putney, who spoke eloquently about the problems of Putney High Street, which is one of the most polluted places in the country. As somebody who rides a bike to Richmond Park occasionally, I have to go and experience it. I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West (Geraint Davies); he is in charge of his facts, and gave powerful personal testimony about asthma and his children.

    Let me say this to Conservative Members, genuinely and from the bottom of my heart: where there are low-traffic neighbourhoods, and where cars are tackled, electoral popularity rises. Tackling air pollution is electorally popular. I look at the percentage chances of Conservative Members winning their seats in the next election. In Dartford, they have a 64% chance of losing. The hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer) has a 57% chance of losing. The hon. Member for Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner (David Simmonds) has a 64% chance of losing. No wonder the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Elliot Colburn) is going on about the Lib Dems—they have a 52% chance of winning that seat.

    Stewart Hosie (in the Chair)

    Order. That is jolly interesting, but the topic is the ultra low emission zone.

    Mike Kane

    I can hear the Risographs of activists in London churning out leaflets about their Members of Parliament who do not want to support clean air. That is a clear divide, and I urge Members to get on the right side of it.