Blog

Crossrail: the new bit of Paddington station looks worth waiting for

The continuing saga of who didn’t tell who what about the non-opening of the Elizabeth Line on 9 December might cause us to forget what a vast and still-impressive feat of construction the Crossrail project is. One of the more ambitious station transformations is that of Paddington, where a whole new Crossrail section is being put together beneath Eastbourne Terrace and Departures Road on the side of the main station building, where for years black cabs have picked up and dropped off rail passengers.

I took trains to and from Paddington for my Easter holiday travel and tried to get a look at the works-in-progress while I was there. I couldn’t see a lot, but imagining it was easier thanks to having attended an excellent London Society event about Paddington’s past and future and also to this short film from Crossrail, produced in 2017.

There were two speakers at the London Society event. Dr Steven Brindle is an English Heritage historian and author of Paddington Station, its History and Architecture. From him I learned, among much else, the extent to which the roots of the Great Western Railway are in the west of England rather than London, what a difficult man Isambard Kingdom Brunel was (unlike his friend Robert Stephenson), and why there’s a great big hotel at the front of the station instead of fine, display entrance. (It’s because the Midland Railway Company had one at St Pancras and the GWR bosses didn’t want to be outdone).

The second speaker was Rob Naybour from architects Weston Williamson & Partners, which has worked on a number of important station projects. There’s lots of material about the Paddington Elizabeth Line design on the company’s website.

Read more about the London Society here. Join it, even. And don’t forget That Bear.

Categories: Culture

TfL boss Mike Brown denies watering down bad news about Crossrail in briefings for the Mayor

Transport for London commissioner Mike Brown has denied claims by the London Assembly’s transport committee that he watered down warnings about the risk of Crossrail not opening on time when briefing Sadiq Khan about the project and dismissed its recommendation that he should “reflect on his fitness” to continue in his job.

Questioned by the committee today at the start of his annual appearance before it, Brown repeatedly said he had conveyed “consistent and coherent” information to the Mayor about the state of the project based on what he and others were told by the then leadership of Crossrail Limited, including at numerous meetings held in public.

A report by the committee, published on Tuesday, into why Crossrail’s Elizabeth Line service did not open as long promised on 9 December last year included extracts from emails which it said showed that Brown had excluded or toned down warnings about elements of the project running in difficulties in his regular briefings to the Mayor.

However, Brown rejected committee chair Caroline Pidgeon AM’s assertion that he had “watered down some of the risks” for mayoral consumption. “The issue about any particular wording is around consistency and coherence of message. It is incumbent on me to make sure that the Mayor gets a consistent and coherent set of briefings,” he said.

He later added in answer to Keith Prince AM that: “A lot of the stuff that we got to put in the briefings for the Mayor frankly wasn’t even legible and I had to ensure that it was properly communicated in a clear and consistent way to the Mayor.”

Brown strongly denied that the Mayor had been kept in the dark about concerns over the start date, telling the committee that a range of issues, including those highlighted by an independent reviewer, had been fully discussed at a series of meetings held in public throughout 2018, including TfL board meetings which the Mayor chaired, as well as numerous private ones attended by the Mayor, Brown and the then chairman of Crossrail, Sir Terry Morgan.

“Let me be very clear that the then chief executive and particularly the then chair [of Crossrail] were absolutely adamant that the December starting date was going to be achieved,” Brown said. “Ultimately the accountability and responsibility for delivering this project was [with] the independent chair and independent board of Crossrail.”

Mayor Khan has expressed full confidence in Brown, who described for the committee visiting Maidenhead, which the Elizabeth Line will serve, on 15 June last year to brief Theresa May in her constituency at a meeting set up by Crossrail. Brown said he was told by Crossrail to “tell the Prime Minister it’s absolutely certain we’re going to meet the ninth of December. I certainly wouldn’t brief the Prime Minister incorrectly if I felt there was a risk to the programme.”

He repeated the claim, also made by the Mayor and his deputy for transport Heidi Alexander that, “Right up until the end of August last year the date on December 9th was being held and in all the discussions – every single discussion – with the then Crossrail chair and chief executive”.

Brown confirmed that he, Mayor Khan and the new Crossrail chairman Tony Meggs will brief the full Assembly in the coming days “as soon as we have a clear indicative plan of the new schedule emerging”.

Categories: News

Unmesh Desai: London’s police service faces a perfect storm of cuts and circumstances

The ongoing onslaught of austerity has hit all parts of London’s public sector hard, but perhaps none more than our police service. The government may claim that austerity is over, but the reality is very different: £850m of cuts to the Met have come from Whitehall since 2010 and with more to come the total is set to top £1 billion by 2023. Police spending per head has fallen faster for the Metropolitan Police than for any other police service, tumbling from £423 in 2013/14 to just £337 four years later.

This is despite the Met facing a unique set of challenges as a direct consequence of serving our capital city. It protects parliament and the monarchy, safeguards major football matches and has responsibility for ensuring that demonstrations of all sorts pass off peacefully and safely. It provides diplomatic protection and facilitates state visits. The Met’s work is vital to our reputation as a world city – a place where people can visit, enjoy and do business in safety.

At the same time, the Met is being asked to do more for a greater number of people than ever before. Crime and the complexity of it is rising across the country and London is no exception. We’ve seen increased reporting of historic sexual offences, a rising threat of terrorism from both religious extremists and the Far Right, and a growing number of crimes committed online, resulting in an expanded need for digital evidence gathering. And with police officers dealing with more hidden crimes such as modern-day slavery, while also being left to pick up the pieces because of the stress austerity has imposed on youth and mental health services, it’s little wonder that the strain is starting to show.

At every turn, resources are stretched. The Met is facing a perfect storm of cuts and circumstances.

In recognition of the unique role police in London play, the National and International Capital Cities (NICC) Grant provides additional funding to the Met and to the separate City of London Police. But even here, the actual funding though falls far short of what is required: Home Office own figures show that the Met receives £95 million a year less through the NICC than it needs to in order to fulfil its additional duties and ordinary Londoners are left to pick up the tab.

Possibly the most visible consequence of cuts is that police officer numbers have fallen. In March 2010, the Met had 33,367 officers serving a city of just over eight million people, but by December of last year this had fallen to 29,693 while London’s population population had risen to over 8.8 million. Inevitably, this leads to stark choices having to be made. As Met commissioner Cressida Dick put it to the House of Commons home affairs select committee, the Met needs either “more money”, a “smaller mission” or a “greater risk appetite”. It cannot be right that central government has starved our police of funding to such an extent that a greater tolerance of risk to public safety could be mooted as a serious proposition.

One consequences of all this, of course, is that police staff are having to work harder than ever before. Jigsaw team offender managers, who deal with registered sex offenders, are handling more than 100 cases each against a target of 50 and it was reported in October that Sapphire command – the specialist team for investigating rape and serious sexual offences – has caseloads of 25 offences per officer. The target is fewer than 15.

The shortage of police officers also means that those we do have are increasingly asked to work longer days and often have their rest days cancelled. Between January and September 2018, 328,010 rest days allocated to Met officers were called off. In the aftermath of serious incidents, we often hear stories of increased police deployment. It’s important to remember that this means the same number of officers working longer shifts or losing their time off in order to provide reassurance and help keep the public safe. And as police budgets shrink, cancelled rest days are at risk of becoming the “new normal”. An increasingly tired police force risks public safety and wellbeing of officers alike.

In February, a Police Federation survey found that almost eight out of 10 police officers across England and Wales reported feeling under stress or anxiety in the previous 12 months. In London, 73 per cent of officers said there weren’t sufficient staff to manage the demands faced by their team or unit, while 62 per cent of respondents said their workload was either too high or much too high. It is, perhaps, unsurprising that voluntary redundancy for Metropolitan Police officers grew from 294 per annum in 2010 to 653 in 2017.

The Met is doing a commendably good job in difficult circumstances. A new health and wellbeing policy has been developed and the organisation has partnered with Optima Health to deliver support and counselling. There’s also excellent work being done at local level to deal with spikes in particular incidents – last year’s crackdown on moped crime, for instance, yielded some outstanding results. But it remains the case that only an end to austerity and the return of adequate funding for our police will enable the sustained uplift in police numbers required and give the Met the capacity it needs.

Good work too is being undertaken at City Hall, where the Mayor is doing everything he can to protect frontline policing, providing an additional £234 million investment in the Met in the coming year. London Assembly members are putting pressure on the government to give our police the resources they need. I’ve proposed motions in the Assembly – passed unanimously – calling for better equipment, fair funding and improved police pay. Our message is clear: in the context of a rising population, the endless pattern of growing caseloads and diminished funding from Whitehall is simply unsustainable. It cannot be allowed to continue.

Unmesh Desai is London Assembly Member for City & East constituency and a member of the Assembly’s police and crime committee.

Categories: Comment

Who are London’s 2019 European elections candidates?

In theory, they still might not even happen if the Conservative government and Labour reach an agreement to get a Brexit deal through the House of Commons in time. But polling cards for elections to the European Parliament on 23 May are already falling through letterboxes, and most of the parties have their candidate lists in order. Nominations close tomorrow. The UK has 73 European Parliament seats, of which eight are for the London region. At the last European elections in 2014, UKIP won the highest number of seats nationally, but only one in London. Labour took four seats in the capital, the Conservatives two and the Green Party, one. Who is hoping to occupy those eight seats this time?

Brexit Party

Nigel Farage’s new electoral vehicle is topping national opinion polls, which may or may not mean something or other at this stage. One thing we do know is that a recent YouGov poll for Queen Mary University of London found that a massive 67 per cent of Londoners would never, ever vote for UKIP. That poll was conducted before the Brexit Party showed up and at a time when UKIP was cuddling up to the so-called “Tommy Robinson”. But even the Farage-led UKIP struggled to make electoral impact in the capital, notwithstanding getting two people on to the London Assembly in 2016 under the “Londonwide” proportional representation part of the poll (both have since left the party).

Can the Brexit Party do better? Top of their list of candidates for the London is Ben Habib, founder and chief executive of the First Property Group. You can get to know him on Twitter. Second on the list is Lance Forman, who runs a celebrated salmon smokehouse at the fringe of the Olympic Park. His family business has operated from various East London sites since 1905 and he fought a long battle with the authorities over the business’s forced relocation from a spot the London Stadium now occupies. He seems to have hit it off with Boris Johnson, to whom he once gave a generous sample of his product (a “side of smoked salmon” was properly declared by the then Mayor on the GLA website). Keen-eyed visitors to Forman’s office have spotted a framed photo of Margaret Thatcher meeting Ronald Reagan. Forman has called for a “no deal” Brexit and says politicians have “totally disregarded” the referendum result and that he’s standing for the Brexit Party “to save democracy“.

Change UK – The Independent Group

The other new party in the Euro race held its national launch in Bristol yesterday, where it was revealed that author and former BBC journalist Gavin Esler will top the party’s list of London region candidates. Commentator Ian Dunt, a passionate Remainer, exempted Esler from his criticism of the party’s messaging, describing his speech as “impressive in terms of content and delivery” and articulating “a kind of liberal populism”.

Second on the list is Jan Vincent-Rostowski, also known as Jacek Rostowski, who was born in London to a Polish exile family in 1951. He went on to serve as government minister in Poland from 2007 until 2013 under the premiership of Donald Tusk, better known these days as president of the European Council. Vincent-Rostowski was named 2009’s European Finance Minister of the Year by The Banker magazine. His Wikipedia entry describes him as “a believer in free markets” and a “fiscal and social conservative”.

He is followed by former Labour MEP Carole Tongue, former Lib Dem turned leader of the Kensington & Chelsea-based Renew Party Annabel Mullin, and vice chair of Liberal Judaism Karen Newman. Also on the list are Nora Mulready, co-director of a rights and welfare charity and former researcher for Tottenham MP David Lammy who left Labour in disgust at its capture by Corbynites and, in eighth and final place, Matrix Chambers barrister Jessica Simor.

Conservative Party

Top of the Tory list is sitting MEP and former London Mayor hopeful Syed Kamall, followed by his MEP colleague Charles Tannock. Then comes Ealing councillor Joy Morrissey who was shortlisted to be Tory mayoral candidate for 2020. On London interviewed her at that time. Westminster councillor Timothy Barnes is fourth on the Conservative list. See the full squad at Conservative Home.

Green Party

The Green octet is headed by Lambeth councillor Scott Ainslie, with Gulnar Hasnain, who worked on climate change polices at at City Hall between 2004 and 2011, in second position. The full Green list is here.

Labour Party

Two of Labour’s current MEPs, Claude Moraes and Seb Dance are on the two top rungs, and then it all gets Very Jeremy. According to Huffington Post, Corbyn’s former political secretary Katy Clark, described by one unhappy insider as a “Lexiteer”, was pushed up the list into third place following an intervention by party officials. Labour looks at some risk of losing one of its four seats due to its facilitation of Brexit and conditional stance on supporting a second referendum. Momentumite Laura Parker is in fourth position and former London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi, now chair of the Stop The War Coalition, is fifth.

Liberal Democrats

The Lib Dems, currently without a London region seat, will certainly hope to get on the scoresheet this time. Their London list is headed by lawyer and human rights activist Irina Von Wiese from Hammersmith. Ebookers founder Dinesh Dhamija is second and Camden’s Luisa Porritt, third. An interesting inclusion further down is Tower Hamlets councillor Rabina Khan, who led on housing policy under the ill-fated Tower Hamlets mayoralty of Lutfur Rahman before forming her own local party then becoming a Lib Dem (she was not implicated in the electoral law legal case that led to Rahman’s downfall).

United Kingdom Independence Party

Sitting London region MEP Gerard Batten, now UKIP’s leader, insists his is still the authentic party of Brexit. He’s at the top of his party’s London list, with software developer Richard Braine, a man know to wear a bowler hat, second.

Last updated on 15 May, 2019.

OnLondon.co.uk exists to provide fair and thorough coverage of London’s politics, development and culture. The site depends on donations from readers and is also seeking support from suitable organisations in order to get bigger and better. Read more about that here. Thank you.

Categories: News

Onkar Sahota: London’s A&E departments are under growing pressure

London’s accident and emergency departments are the frontline of our precious National Health Service. At one time or another, we all end up there – with loved ones, or in need of urgent care ourselves. A trip to an A&E is usually a decision of last resort – but it’s always an option, round the clock, every day of the year. The dedicated staff there know that every moment matters in often life-threatening situations.

In the context of a London population that has risen to 8.8 million, the demands on this most vital of services are rising too, with 4.2 million admissions in the capital in 2017-18 – up from four million the year before. Londoners have a right to know that if they require urgent care that they’ll get the treatment they need quickly. And our healthcare professionals have the right to rest, to training opportunities, and to a high quality and safe working environment.

The sad reality, though, is that years of austerity have seriously impacted standards. In a period which has seen demand rise, we’ve also seen a fall in the number of available hospital beds, with 2,300 being lost in London since 2010. And it’s not just beds we’re losing – it’s entire departments.

In 2013 the government downgraded the A&Es at both Central Middlesex and Hammersmith hospitals to the status of urgent care centres. A threat of something similar has, until recently, hung over the Ealing and Charing Cross hospitals. But now that, thanks to an energetic campaign, the closure of these A&Es, proposed under the discredited Shaping a Healthier Future plan, has been abandoned and accepted as a mistake, it is only right that the paediatric and maternity services withdrawn under the same programme should be re-instated.

It’s just as well the Ealing and Charing Cross A&Es were saved, given the depth of the crisis we now face. In the last year, not a single one of London’s A&Es met their target of treating or admitting 95 per cent of patients within four hours or less – and it’s a target that hasn’t been met consistently since 2014. The consequence is that ever-greater numbers of poorly or injured Londoners are being left in waiting rooms for far longer than they were before austerity took hold.

In the final quarter of last year, A&E performance in London slumped to a record low, with 13.5 per cent of attendees not being seen by the four hour target. The number of “trolley waits” in corridors of more than twelve hours has also increased significantly, and in the last year over 1,000 patients waited in ambulances outside for over an hour. This state of affairs simply cannot be allowed to continue – but after a decade of historically unprecedented austerity in healthcare, what else are we to expect?

Workloads are inevitably rising too – and at a time when recruitment is proving more challenging than ever before. There are now over 100,000 vacant posts in the NHS – a lengthy pay freeze and the cost of living in London have combined to make healthcare a far less attractive career that it once was. With ongoing Brexit uncertainty making it harder than ever before to recruit healthcare professionals from elsewhere in Europe, it simply beggars belief that the government has chosen now of all times to abolish nursing bursaries.

Addressing the crisis in our A&E departments – and indeed the NHS more generally – requires a holistic approach. If we’re to reduce the pressure on them, we must properly invest in the system as a whole, reducing waiting times for GP appointments, adequately funding local authorities and staging public health interventions that cut across sectors and agencies.

London’s population is not only growing, it is also ageing. Fixing social care would do a great deal to free up beds and also provide many older people with greater independence and a more appropriate care package for their needs. Even so, the growth in population would still have to be addressed.

Despite having no formal powers over the NHS, the Mayor and the London Assembly have spoken up for Londoners and held the NHS and government to account. In staging major public health interventions such as the Ultra Low Emission Zone, Sadiq Khan is taking important steps towards improving Londoners’ health. We’ve seen the Health Inequalities Strategy help set the agenda and play a role in preventing the Ealing and Charing Cross closures. And the Mayor has also taken the public health approach into the heart of our A&E departments, with £1.4 million earmarked to fund specialist casualty youth workers to help young victims of knife crime.

This shows what can be achieved with if there’s the will to tackle the problems that face us and, crucially, the funding. I will keep fighting for the resources that London’s health services need. After ten years of austerity, they’ve suffered enough. With proper investment across our society, together we can rebuild our NHS and deliver first-class healthcare for all Londoners.

Dr Onkar Sahota is London Assembly Member for Ealing & Hillingdon and a member of the Assembly’s health committee.

Categories: Comment

Mayor defends TfL chief against Assembly Crossrail criticisms

Sadiq Khan has expressed “every confidence” in Transport for London (TfL) commissioner Mike Brown in the face of calls for him to consider resigning over delays to the opening of the Crossrail Elizabeth Line.

The Mayor’s defence of Brown follows publication of a report by the London Assembly’s transport committee whose eleven recommendations include that “the commissioner reflects on whether he is fit to fulfil his role in TfL”.

The transport committee report, entitled Derailed: Getting Crossrail Back On Track, says that emails between Crossrail Limited, the TfL-owned company delivering the project, and TfL itself suggest that weekly communications to the Mayor about progress towards the opening of the Elizabeth Line service were being “managed” by Brown with the effect of downplaying the risk of the intended start date of December 2018 being missed.

Caroline Pidgeon, the experienced Liberal Democrat AM who chairs the transport committee, said “the evidence suggests that Mike Brown was at the centre of decisions to dilute important information send to the Mayor”.

However, the Mayor has retorted that “both the TfL commissioner and I have been fully transparent about what we knew about the delays to Crossrail, including around the the key information the previous Crossrail leadership gave to TfL and the Department for Transport (DfT)”.

Sir Terry Morgan, who had chaired Crossrail since 2009, resigned in December following a public disagreement with Mayor Khan over when the Mayor had been informed that the Elizabeth Line would not open on time. In his statement, the Mayor reiterated his view that TfL and the DfT “should have been told much more, far sooner” by Sir Terry and his senior colleagues.

The Mayor added that new Crossrail chairman Tony Meggs is “strengthening the project’s governance”. New chief executive Mark Wild confirmed at the TfL board meeting in March that he will announce a new plan for the opening of the main, central stretch of the Elizabeth Line during this month. Recent reports have indicated it could now be delayed until 2021 although a “best case scenario” of spring 2020 and a “middle probability case” of next summer were also possible.

A spokesperson for Brown and TfL has, as MayorWatch reports, similarly rejected the transport committee’s conclusions, saying, “It is entirely incorrect to suggest the Transport Commissioner, or anyone at TfL, kept any information from the Mayor.”

The committee, comprising four Labour and three Conservative AMs plus one Green and one member of the Brexit Alliance Group (formerly of UKIP) as well as Pidgeon, also recommended that the Mayor and the TfL board, which he chairs, “must strengthen control over TfL” so they can be better informed about progress on projects for which they are ultimately responsible. The report argues that “unchecked optimism” has been a problem within TfL before, citing delays in the upgrade of some London Underground lines.

There are also criticisms of the “corporate culture” of Crossrail, which is accused of its own over-optimism about meeting the project completion date and having an executive that “did not have the skills required at the later stages of the programme to adequately assess and understand risk as the project moved from construction to operations”. It points out that a review produced in January 2018 by a team of independent auditors had found “significant risks” to achieving the December 2018 opening date, but that these were not acted on adequately.

Blame for this is partly attributed to the wider Crossrail “governance model” for failing to give the role of the independent reviewers sufficient weight. Crossrail was set up to function at “arms length” from both mayoral and national government with the intention of insulating it against political interference.

However, the report records concerns that this “light-touch approach” made it difficult for TfL and the DfT, which are Crossrail’s joint sponsors and funders, “to fully understand the programme and its risks”. It notes that earlier this year the Mayor’s deputy for transport, Heidi Alexander, questioned whether “the governance arrangements that have been put in place for this project are right”.

Photograph from transport committee report by Hugh Llewelyn.

Categories: News

The London of Nell Dunn and Up The Junction

Nell Dunn was a “posh bird” from Chelsea, a knight’s daughter and the maternal granddaughter of the man who broke the bank at Monte Carlo. In 1959, she moved south of the river to what was then run down, working-class Battersea and wrote a series of short stories about her new life there. They were published in 1963 under the title Up The Junction. Here’s how the first story begins:

“We stand, the three of us, me, Sylvie and Rube, pressed up against the saloon door, brown ales clutched in our hands. Rube, neck stiff so as not to shake her beehive, stares sultrily round the packed pub. Sylvie eyes the boy hunched over the mike and shifts her gaze down to her breasts snug in her new pink jumper. ‘Kiss! Kiss! Kiss!’ he screams. Three blokes beckon us over to their table.

‘Fancy ’em?’

Rube doubles up with laughter. ‘Come on, then. They can buy us some beer.’

‘Hey, look out, yer steppin’ on me winkle!’

Dignified, the three of us squeeze between tables and sit ourselves, knees tight together, daintily on the chairs.

‘Three browns, please,’ says Sylvie before we’ve been asked.

‘I’ve seen you in here before, aint I?’ A boy leans luxuriously against the leather jacket slung over the back of his chair.

‘Might ‘ave done.’

‘You come from Battersea, don’t yer?’

‘Yeah, me and Sylvie do. She don’t though. She’s an heiress from Chelsea.’

‘Really? You really an heiress?’ Jimmy Dean moves his chair closer to mine, sliding his arm along the back.

‘Are yer married?’

‘Course she is. What do yet think that is? Scotch mist?’ Rube points to my wedding ring.

‘Sylvie says, ‘Bet they’re all married, dirty ginks!’

‘Like to dance?’

Rube moves on to the floor. She hunches up her shoulders round her ears, sticks out her lower lip and swings in time to the shattering music.

‘What’s it like, havin’ a ton of money?’

‘You can’t buy love.’

‘No, but you can buy a bit of the other.’ Sylvie chokes, spewing out brown ale.

‘I’d get a milk-white electric guitar.’

‘Yeah and a milk-white Cadillac convertible – walk in the shop and feel off the notes. Bang ’em down on the counter and drive out – that’s what yer dad does, I bet…’

Up The Junction won both plaudits and disapproval for its spare but vivid social realism. Dunn was accused by some of slumming, but New Statesman, which published one of the stories before the book came out, defended her, saying she was “reworking a national literary tradition, the love affair between the classes”.

Ken Loach was an admirer. He and Dunn adapted the book for a BBC Wednesday Play, which Loach directed. Sylvie was played by Carol White, who became famous the following year as the protagonist of Cathy Come Home, the epochal TV drama about homelessness, also directed by Loach, and written by Dunn’s then spouse, Jeremy Sandford. In 1967, White starred in another Loach-directed adaption of a Dunn book, Poor Cow, this time turned into a feature film.

Here’s the Wednesday Play version of Up The Junction. It’s an hour long.

Three years later, in 1968, a film version came out, starring Suzy Kendall as Dunn, along with Maureen Lipman (Sylvie), Adrienne Posta (Rube) and Dennis Waterman. Here’s a classic class-and-culture clash clip.

Nell Dunn’s next big success came in 1981, with the play Steaming, which later become a movie too. If you don’t own a copy of Up The Junction, you really ought to. It is, as a 2013 Virago reprint puts it, a classic of 1960s London Life.

Categories: Culture

Dave Hill: London’s public transport booze ban should be respected

Who likes a pisshead on the Tube? Not many people, I reckon. Not the passengers in crowded carriages who must endure their loud, intrusive presence in a confined space below ground. Not those waiting on platforms who edge away from their stumbling salutations and unpredictable lurching a few feet from a live rail. Not the London Underground staff who have to deal with boozed up individuals who pose a potential danger to others and to themselves.

The good news is that disruptive drunkenness is generally rare on the Underground. That is, no doubt, in part because the already plastered are often prevented from passing through ticket gates in the first place, but it is also because of the ban on alcohol consumption on all public transport that was introduced by Boris Johnson from 1 June, 2008, soon after he became London Mayor.

His rationale was simple. “I’m determined to improve the safety and security of public transport in London,” he said, and the booze ban was a quick and easy honouring of a bunch of manifesto pledges to that end.

Johnson characterised the move as “broken windows theory” put into practice, though no dedicated additional policing was involved (British Transport Police don’t fall into the orbit of London Mayors anyway). Rather, in reality, the ban was to be voluntarily observed and informally enforced through public pressure.

There was publicity and there were announcements. The late Bob Crow, leader of the RMT union at the time, said the ban was “poorly thought through”, but said he supported the principle of “any measure” that made his members’ lives easier. The aim was to effect a culture shift. Transport for London drew comparisons with public support for the earlier public transport smoking ban.

A “last round on the Underground” party took place the night before the ban came into effect. Six stations had to be closed, four Tube drivers, three station staff members and two police officers were assaulted. Several trains were damaged and had to be withdrawn from service. I attended a Johnson press conference on a separate issue the morning after. He was jovial about the defiant festivities, which mostly occurred on the Circle Line, back in the days when – as Generation X so memorably sang – it went round and round and round and round. “Boris” did not wish to seem a killjoy, like some humourless Lefty, and the rowdy among the revellers had, in any case, handed him the vindication he required.

That is the backdrop to the media kerfuffle over Diane Abbott MP being caught sipping from a can of mojito on a London Overground train last week. Her misdemeanour was reported by The Sun, fuelling a predictable online defence campaign that has had the useful side effect of confirming what a sorry state the Labour Party is in. It is right to stick up for Abbott against the vermin who abuse her for being female and black, but a shadow home secretary (and one time mayoral hopeful) who breaks the law, however trivial the infringement or slim the chance of prosecution, risks weakening her party’s already fragile credibility.

Abbott rightly and wisely apologised. That has not deterred droves of Corbynites from getting off on declaring they #StandWithDiane and snapping themselves on public transport with their own tinned tipples, revealing both their political naivety and the galloping self-indulgence beneath the solidarity pieties. And is there any sight more absurd than the middle-classes trying to act well ‘ard? Hypocrisy is a factor in this too. Had a Tory minister been subjected to the same embarrassment, Abbott’s champions would, of course, be crowing.

The greater value of the incident has been to remind Londoners and others that the city’s public transport booze ban still exists and has done more good than harm. It may be true, as has been quite reasonably argued, that the drinking problem was never all that big in the first place and that very few people have been convicted of the offence of imbibing alcohol while in transit on bus, tram, DLR, Overground or Underground – the mode where, perhaps, the desirability of passenger sobriety is greatest.

But Johnson’s reform was a recognition of the wishes of the majority and has provided a gentle nudge in the direction of increased public transport civility. Would any London politician serious about securing high office recommend ending the city’s public transport booze ban? I doubt it, and that includes Diane Abbott.

 

Categories: Comment