Blog

Caroline Pidgeon: Covid-19 crisis has highlighted poor treatment of London bus drivers

Any article about Covid-19 must start with the caveat “at the time of writing”. No statistics or details about its brutal effects are the same two days in a row. Even so, it is clear that a full  examination of its impacts on London’s bus drivers is needed. We know that least 29 transport workers in London have died from Covid-19, of which 23 were bus drivers or bus workers. The final figure will surely be higher. There are 25,000 bus drivers in London, suggesting that the death rate from Covid-19 could be disproportionately hitting this group of workers. We need to know why.

It will take some time to fully understand the varying death rates from Covid-19 among different communities and sections of the workforce. The cry has been made in anger – and righteous anger is no bad thing – that more could have been done to improve bus driver safety and to save lives. Some of that has been directed at the Mayor, yet bus drivers are employed by bus companies rather than by Transport for London, so their actions need to be looked at too. Why is it, for example, that TfL has, rather than their employers, has been bulk-purchasing hand sanitiser for bus drivers’ use?

It may be that recent measures to improve the safety of bus drivers – and passengers – should have been introduced more quickly, and it could be that further measures will be needed, including issuing drivers with personal protective equipment. But if we are to make permanent progress, we must examine all the evidence and not just assume that every Covid-19 death has been caused by interactions between drivers and passengers.

Specific factors about drivers’ working lives outside buses themselves could be contributing to their susceptibility. Conditions at bus depots need to be examined. Incredibly, only now are we finally ensuring that drivers have access to toilets and hand washing facilities on all bus routes. We also need to explore why many bus drivers have, in the past, felt the need to come into work even when feeling unwell. The fact that many of them travel long distances each day before beginning their shifts should also be considered. Many simply can’t afford to live closer to their depots. Why are they so poorly paid?

For too long the bus industry has been allowed to treat its employees in ways that would not be acceptable in other industries. From 2009, TfL expected the London Living Wage to be paid to all staff working on the London bus network, and began including this condition in its contracts with the bus companies. But eight years later it was suddenly ‘”discovered” that these terms were not being applied to trainee drivers.

That eight years of non-compliance also says a great deal about TfL’s historic light touch when it comes to the terms of contracts with bus companies. The theory that moves by senior bus industry figures into to senior TfL management positions has created too cosy a regulatory relationship should not be quickly dismissed.

Thankfully, fatigue among bus drivers – a widespread problem that can put drivers and other road-users at risk –  is now starting to be taken seriously, following powerful evidence collected by Loughborough University transport safety research group, funded by TfL. Yet senior bus industry figures must surely have been aware of this problem for years. The only other possible explanation is ignorance of it. Neither is attractive.

More recently the Mayor announced a package of support to improve job retention in the bus industry, involving payments of up to £1,600. But surely it is the bus companies that should be addressing low levels of pay. The Labour Party has a record of highlighting the high bus company profits. So why is a Labour Mayor using taxpayers’ money to improve their employees wages?

We need to know why so many bus drivers have recently died in London from Covid-19. We also need to ensure that every safety policy is being properly enforced on every bus and at every depot. If we are really concerned about the safety of bus drivers we need to look at the bigger picture – starting with the bus companies.

Caroline Pidgeon is a Liberal Democrat London Assembly Member. Follow her on Twitter.

OnLondon.co.uk is doing all it can to keep providing the best possible coverage of  London during the coronavirus crisis. It now depends more than ever on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via Donorbox or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

Categories: Comment

Enfield leader asks government for ‘immediate expansion’ of Covid-19 care home testing as death toll climbs

The leader of Enfield Council has renewed her appeal to the government to “step up the scale, speed and scope of its activity to protect those living and working in care homes”, saying that half the care homes in the borough have “declared an outbreak” of the virus in their premises and that “120 confirmed of suspected Covid-19 deaths” have been recorded in them.

In a letter to health secretary Matt Hancock, Nesil Caliskan says “there needs to be an immediate expansion of the testing programme, beyond what the government has announced over the last few days,” arguing that what she calls the current “light touch testing regime” is “not good enough”.

The government has promised that all care home residents and staff with Covid-19 symptoms will be tested after outbreaks were reported at more than 2,000 home across the country. Previously, tests were restricted to the first five residents in a home to show symptoms in order to establish if an outbreak had occurred.

However, Caliskan, who first wrote to Hancock about the care homes issue on 16 April, says the new measures are neither extensive enough nor being provided with sufficient speed to prevent the number of infections from growing rapidly and many “unnecessary deaths” occuring among care home residents and workers.

She also reports that care homes in Enfield are “concerned that they are not receiving clear support and direction” from either the government or from its agency Public Health England about getting the help and advice they need, and that care homes are unsure which NHS body is responsible for testing after initial outbreaks have been identified.

In her letter, which is co-signed by Alev Cazimoglu, Enfield’s Cabinet Member for Health and Adult Social Care, Caliskan says there should be “a comprehensive and regular” care home testing programme, to enable “infection control” rather than simply monitoring people for the virus. She says there is concern that test results won’t be shared quickly enough, meaning staff cannot implement the most appropriate changes within homes to interrupt further spread of the virus.

It has long been a concern of care homes that although residents returning to them from hospitals are tested for the virus, the results might not been known until after they have been discharged, meaning they could be carrying the coronavirus for two or three days without staff knowing.

Caliskan asks that “mobile testing units” able to visit care homes are be quickly organised, pointing out that the one drive-through centre in Enfield is at the eastern edge of the borough, making it hard to get to for many care workers and of no use to those who don’t own cars. Additionally, she requests that testing kits are sent to all care homes “regularly and systematically” as part of “a clear programme’ for regular, repeat testing.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics, which records all deaths across the country, show that nine per cent of Covid-19 related deaths in Greater London as of 10 April were in care homes. On London understands that in Croydon, which contains over 140 care homes, the council has been informed of at least 70 Covid-19 related deaths.

OnLondon.co.uk is doing all it can to keep providing the best possible coverage of  London during the coronavirus crisis. It now depends more than ever on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via Donorbox or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

Categories: News

Woodberry Down estate regeneration film: partnerships in progress

Last week, Hackney Council gave planning consent for phase three of the long regeneration of the huge Woodberry Down estate in Manor House. The project, which is being undertaken by Berkeley Homes along with Notting Hill Genesis housing association, has been the subject of some quite atrocious journalism in the past: the sort that ignores those parts of a complex and evolving picture that don’t conform to the ideological prejudices of the supposed reporter.

Every regeneration scheme is different. Not all have been done well, and each one has many dimensions to it. A feature of the Woodberry Down process has been the evolution of the relationships between the various interested parties, perhaps most notably the developer and the organisation representing estate residents. The On London mini-documentary embedded below is an attempt to tell part of that story and to draw out the lessons from it.

The film was edited and mostly shot by Max Curwen-Bingley. The interview with Tony Pidgley was filmed by Suhail Patel. The script, narration, interviews and some of the estate footage is the work of me, Dave Hill. Huge thanks to everyone who appears in the film and helped it to come about.

Watch On London’s documentary about the regeneration of the Aylesbury estate in Southwark here.

OnLondon.co.uk is doing all it can to keep providing the best possible coverage of  London during the coronavirus crisis. It now depends more than ever on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via Donorbox or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories: Analysis

Coronavirus London: What do the latest statistics show?

For now at least it seems that London, followed by the rest of the country, is past the very worst. The most recent figures for people in hospital with Covid-19 symptoms confirm that although London still has the highest number in Britain the figure is continuing to fall steadily and, in the word of Deputy Chief Medical Officer for England Jenny Harries yesterday, “markedly”. Below is a screen grab of the slide shown at yesterday’s Downing Street briefing.

Screenshot 2020 04 25 at 13.23.53

The number of deaths per day in London hospitals where the coronavirus was found to be present has also maintained a general downward trend, albeit an uneven one. This is shown by the latest graph of NHS England data published by the Greater London Authority, which covers the period up until Thursday (two days before this article was published). Note that the bars for the most recent five days are likely to grow taller. And don’t forget that the total number of Covid-19 related deaths in London hospitals is still rising – as of Thursday it had reached 4,426.

Screenshot 2020 04 25 at 13.29.00

What other trends are official figures showing? The GLA is also publishing (in the London Datastore) figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), which cover all deaths, not only those that take place in hospitals. They are not as up to date as NHS England’s figures, but currently do go up to the 10 April. The chart reproduced below shows the percentages of Covid-19 related deaths in London that have happened in care homes, at home, in hospices and elsewhere as well as in hospitals. The vast majority – 84 per cent – have been in hospitals, but as of two weeks ago, care home deaths had accounted for a significant nine per cent.

Screenshot 2020 04 25 at 13.46.41

And here is one other graph of ONS stats that might be very significant, given that the NHS, doctors and charities have begun urging people who need medical care for reasons other than the virus not to be deterred from seeking it. The graph shows that the total number of deaths to which Covid-19 did not contribute rose in three consecutive weeks after Covid-related deaths began in significant numbers and the lockdown was imposed.

Screenshot 2020 04 25 at 13.49.14

It seems reasonable to worry that some people who might in normal times have sought and received medical help for various conditions that prevented them from dying have not been doing so since the emergency took hold. We might hear more about that before long.

OnLondon.co.uk is doing all it can to keep providing the best possible coverage of  London during the coronavirus crisis. It now depends more than ever on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via Donorbox or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

Categories: Analysis

Coronavirus London: The complex needs of traumatised rough sleepers

A recent On London podcast featured part of a phone interview with Laura Pilcher, who is lead manager of Martha Jones House, a 50-bed Thames Reach hostel for street homeless men and women in Vauxhall. The signal wasn’t great, which meant some of what Laura said didn’t come through clearly enough to use in audio form. To make up for that, here’s a slightly fuller Q&A account of our conversation, which was so enlightening and left me full of admiration for the work of Laura and her colleagues.

Question: How has the coronavirus outbreak changed how you do your job?

Answer: There is an increased need to make sure everybody that’s in the hostel absolutely needs to be here and that we’re accommodating the people who are the most in need of 24-hour supported housing. That involved us looking at our cohort and moving on people that could manage with less support, so that we could accept those that really do need the high level of support we provide here.

We support people with really complex needs. Martha Jones House accommodates men and women who have experienced lots of trauma and multiple disadvantage, and because of that have lots of needs around substance use and their mental health, and often physical health needs and offending issues as well. In order to effectively support that client group, it requires the input of lots and lots of different agencies.

So we work closely with GP surgeries and nurses and mental health teams and substance use teams to offer the right support to keep everybody well. The idea is that we are supporting people to address their needs so they can be more independent. What has happened as a result of Covid-19 is that all of our support services in-reach have stopped. So there are no other services currently providing support within the hostel, so as a team it is now just us. That’s the big change.

Q: That sounds pretty dramatic.

A: It is quite dramatic. So, pre-coronavirus, in the hostel, there would be various teams based in the hostel or visiting the hostel, and that has dramatically reduced. The nurses who work across homeless services in Lambeth, and are utterly wonderful, are still able to offer weekly clinics at Martha Jones House but all of the other services are no longer coming into the hostel. Some are still providing some support, for example by phone, but the nature of the sorts of people that we’re trying to support means there is a limit to how effective that can be.

The job for the core team at Martha Jones House has become significantly more challenging and more difficult. The need is actually higher than it was before all of this for the residents, because everything about their lives has been so disrupted. They have more needs that we have to try and address, and there are less services to address those needs, so as a team we’re left with a really difficult situation. There are people who have very complex needs that need lots and lots of support, and it is now just the team here doing that.

Q: Can you explain a bit more about the impact the coronavirus has had?

A: If you think about people who are homeless and, for example, have substance use needs, the way that they fund that substance misuse is to beg. And people can’t beg at the moment, so they can’t fund their substance use in the usual ways. That has interrupted their habits and meant that their behaviour has become more challenging, as they are more distressed. They use substances as a way of coping with the trauma they’ve experienced. If you take away those substances, they are left with all of this trauma and distress that they don’t have another way of coping with. So there is more challenging behaviour and more incidents in the hostel, and the team are having to respond to that on a day to day basis.

Q: Looking at the efforts being made to help London’s rough sleepers overall, dare you hope that in the longer term some good might come of this?

A: I hope that this situation has made the government think about the numbers they are working with that they identify as rough sleepers and that the need is significantly larger than they have been willing to acknowledge before. I hope that that remains, post-coronavirus.

Photograph of Martha Jones House from Thames Reach.

 

Categories: Analysis

Vic Keegan’s Lost London 140: The Gothic Foreign Office that never was

In 1858 the great architect George Gilbert Scott was awarded the contract to build the new Foreign Office building in Horse Guards Road. It was a dream come true. Here was his chance to create a masterpiece in his favourite Gothic Revival style to mirror the elegance of the Houses of Parliament, designed by his friend and rival Charles Barry, on the other side of Parliament Square.

All was going swimmingly until he met an immovable object in the form of the new Prime Minister, Lord Palmerston, an unabashed classicist who feared that, left to himself, Scott would “gothicise” the whole of London.

In a desperate attempt to get his plans confirmed by the new government before Palmerston interfered, Scott submitted over 100 drawings to the House of Commons library and had the plans featured in the leading building magazines. He even had a competitive tender for the construction of the building submitted, which delighted the then chancellor, William Gladstone, who was able to include the agreed figure in his budget.

But Gladstone was not Palmerston, whose implacable distaste for all things Gothic proved an obstacle too far. He summoned Scott and told him bluntly that he would have nothing to do with his ghastly plan, but would be happy for Scott to retain his commission as long as he did something in “the Italian style”. Scott agreed, but only after writing a final 20-page detailed case in a forlorn hope that the PM would change his mind. He duly built an admirable neo-classical building, which still stands proudly facing St James’s Park.

However, if you want to know what the Gothic version might have looked like, take a trip to St Pancras to see what was originally called the Midland Grand Hotel, another Scott design. Now the St Pancras Renaissance Hotel, it bears a bizarre resemblance to what Scott would have designed for Horse Guards Road had he been allowed.

The tower has been repositioned and implanted with a clock, but the stylistic similarities are unmistakeable. The building was saved from demolition in the 1960s by a campaign led by Sir John Betjeman. And so Scott’s dream continues to be fulfilled, despite the fact that his fantasy building contains no diplomats, only overnight guests.

All previous instalments of Vic Keegan’s Lost London can be found here.

OnLondon.co.uk is committed to providing the best possible coverage of London’s politics, development, social issues and culture. It depends on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via PayPal or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

 

 

 

Categories: Culture, Lost London

Karen Buck: We must act now to help young Londoners struggling under the lockdown

London is a young city, but it isn’t always an easy one to be young in. Yes, we have enjoyed the benefits of a stronger economy and more employment than is true of many other regions and towns, and London is quite simply an amazing, diverse, creative place to be. But that’s not London’s only story.

This week, two new reports highlighted some of the challenges faced by young Londoners before, during and potentially after lockdown. The 2020 London Poverty Profile reinforced the point – too little understood outside the capital – that intense deprivation sits alongside massive wealth, with 28 per cent of Londoners living below the poverty line and a staggeringly high three-quarters of very low income London households including at least person who is in work.

High costs, especially of housing, not only undermine living standards but drive the secondary problem of bad housing, with housing insecurity and overcrowding being endemic. All this was already denying a generation of young people their capacity to achieve independence, the ability to find a home of their own. Some stayed crammed into the parental home – like Jamal, who, at 22, shares the second bedroom in his parents’ flat with two younger siblings. Others have literally spent years sofa-surfing. Ali stayed with his girlfriend until the relationship broke down, and only came off the street at age 19 after he was stabbed. Calum slept in the family car whenever his other options ran out. I’ve seen scenarios like this in any average week, and they were tough enough. And then came the virus.

The second report which shines a light into the lives of young Londoners looks at how Covid-19 and the lockdown have affected them in my own borough, Westminster. In other words, take an already harsh environment for a great many young people and ratchet up the pressure, sometimes to breaking point. The Young Westminster Foundation looked at how our young people are coping and identified a number of challenges which we, as a society, have to respond to both during and after these difficult weeks. For what is clear is that whilst many young people will come through this unscathed and many are doing brilliantly supporting their families and their communities, those who are not may experience lasting damage. It is absolutely not too early to start planning for how we get through not just lockdown but the world beyond it so that the damage is not too great.

The charity Young Minds had already identified that four out of five young people with existing issues with poor mental health were finding it harder to cope. The Foundation drew particular attention to the detrimental impact of spending all day on social media, with increased negativity and targeted harassment, including pressures around body image, and the potentially increased risk of sexual exploitation and harassment.

Young people with responsibilities at home can struggle with the lack of any relief from the pressure, with no quiet spaces for working and the stress of overcrowding. Sadly, some family situations were already hard enough to cope with, even abusive or violent, and the increased reporting of domestic violence is evidence of how lockdown aggravates existing tensions. The Foundation reports considerable anxiety about the inability to get closure following the death of loved ones. They worry about big extended families meaning increased risks, loved ones becoming mere numbers among so many others, and other types of illness, disability and causes of death (other than from Covid-19) seeming to be forgotten.

To all this can be added an understandable anxiety about a future which has never been so unpredictable, and which has transformed at a speed which few of us can process. Many young people are currently looking for jobs or are in their final year of school or university and need to adapt. Jobs and internships are cancelled. Plans have to be reshaped with no real ability to do the reshaping and few places to turn to for help. Many young people lack a safety net and cannot afford to miss out few months’ work. Some have no income at all. Despite some incredible work by our voluntary organisations, information and support is hard to find – not least because we are dealing with the consequences of a decade of cuts to children’s and youth services

To all these can be added some very specific risks to do with crime and policing. The disruption of county lines and the drug economy during the Covid crisis has the potential to lead to violent instability among young Londoners caught up in it. And, finally, the police are required to enforce the legal requirements of lockdown while rightly applying their own judgement to the specific circumstances. They are doing this well and with obvious public support. Yet, as the Foundation report highlights, the relationship between young people and the police can still sometimes be one of mistrust, whilst there may also be a general lack of awareness about social distancing which could lead young people to not follow advice or fully appreciate the consequences. These sources of potential tension are as likely to intensify as to diminish in the weeks and months to come.

After a decade in which the needs and interests of young people – especially the most disadvantaged – have been marginalised, the situation is now urgent and the costs of failure and delay, too high. We need responses tailored to local conditions, of course. What works in Westminster may not be what is required in Barnet or Croydon. But government must step up and support councils and voluntary organisations. The time is now.

Karen Buck is the MP for Westminster North. Follow her on Twitter. Photograph: Some Young Westminster Foundation ambassadors.

OnLondon.co.uk is doing all it can to keep providing the best possible coverage of  London during the coronavirus crisis. It now depends more than ever on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via Donorbox or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

Categories: Comment

Corona City: Covid cops

We’ve all heard of covert policing, the type that involves cops tackling wrong-doers without anyone noticing. We now have Covid policing, which sometimes seems to involve cops doing wrong for everyone to see.

There have been some prize examples of this. Last week, a whole bunch of Old Bill gathered on Westminster Bridge to “clap for carers”, seemingly unaware that hanging out in groups of fellow humans with whom you do not live can mean getting your collar felt and being fined. Photos have appeared of clusters of constables bearing down on barbecues in Camden because barbecuers aren’t meant to cluster there. Complex constellations of boys and girls in blue have been witnessed in close-knit, cross-cutting formations bellowing at solitary walkers in London parks to “go home!”. Is this how to protect the NHS?

There is a frothier side to this. An Inner London shopkeeper who does a tidy trade in take-out coffee is delighted that regular patrons now include a van of jolly rozzers, who stop by to place bulk espresso orders. Their visits are street corner comedies of social distance inconsistency: first, they all emerge from the intimacy of their vehicle; they then completely fail to spread out; one of their number strides towards the gurgling Gaggia, causing masked bystanders to scatter. “Don’t come any closer, officer!” a saucy female customer exclaimed the other day as a rugged man in uniform approached. “I don’t want you to raise my temperature!”

It would be good, though, to get out more – pause for ironic laughter – and arrive at a longer view of how the Met is handling the all-new London street environment. In some ways, there is less for officers to do: if it’s any consolation as the lockdown lengthens, street crime in its different forms – stabbings, robberies, burglaries – have become less frequent. Scams are booming, though, and there are obvious grounds for worrying about what might be going on behind closed doors: the Met commissioner said two weeks ago that the figures did not, at that stage, point to a rise in domestic violence. But if you’re trapped indoors with somebody who beats you up, it must be harder to summon a policeman.

Finally, wouldn’t it be strange if police and politicians have not gone into metaphorical huddles and made contingencies for bursts of opportunist outdoor villainy or outbreaks of disorder and unrest? A point is surely drawing nearer when pent-up impatience among those who believe themselves immune starts to run out. Think of gung-ho young males missing their mates and the pub. And crooks have to make a living too, you know.

Joshing aside, the Met Plod do seem alive to this. Last week on a street corner, a team of them in plain clothes emerged from an unmarked car and stopped and searched three young lads out on a stroll. The other day, during my approved daily constitutional, I passed a parked car with its kerb-side front window smashed. Those two sightings felt incongruous and eerie amid London’s current mass civil obedience. It was a reminder that, below the surface, the contest between nefariousness and those who combat it continues in pretty much the same old way.

John Vane writes word sketches of London. Sometimes he makes things up. He also tweets.

OnLondon.co.uk is doing all it can to keep providing the best possible coverage of  London during the coronavirus crisis. It now depends more than ever on donations from readers. Individual sums or regular monthly contributions are very welcome indeed. Click here to donate via Donorbox or contact davehillonlondon@gmail.com. Thank you.

 

Categories: Culture