And lo, Gordon Brown spends, spends, spends to bailout Metronet

A few days ago I wrote about the huge financial headache left when tube maintenance company Metronet collapsed. Labour has now had to bail out the mess – a mess caused by their part-privatisation of our tube network in the first place.

It again shines a light on one of the real problems with these sorts of PPP deals: there were sold as shifting the risk to the private sector (who also got the chance to make profits). Instead, we’ve seen firms making profits – but in the end the risk still stays with us taxpayers. As Norman Baker (Lib Dem MP and general scourge of all things wrong) put it: “Just like Northern Rock, the private sector takes the profit when they can, and the public sector bails them out when matters go pear-shaped.”

The one small piece of good news in all this? The bailout bill looks to be coming in at £1.7 billion rather than £1.9 billion.

The £1.9 billion bill that could haunt Gordon Brown

Tube trainAs if the £50 billion plus pumped into saving Northern Rock wasn’t enough, this week brought more bad news for Gordon Brown’s record of prudence.

The Commons Transport Committee published a report into the collapse of Metronet (and good to see Brian Paddick getting into that story too – read more here). Metronet was one of the private contractors foisted on London’s tube at the insistence of Gordon Brown and his inner circle, who were determined to part-privatise the tube network come what may.

The result? A badly thought out, badly implemented and hugely expensive scheme. Just setting up the deal cost huge amounts of money – putting together mindbogglingly complicated contracts and running up extra borrowing costs. In 2004 the National Audit Office put the cost put introducing part-privatisation at approaching £1 billion – yes billion: £455 million in legal etc costs in drawing up the scheme and £450 million in extra borrowing costs.

So – Metronet collapsed,upgrade and maintenance work in doubt and a huge bill floating around that someone will have to pick up. Not exactly a proud track-record for Labour when it comes to London’s public services!

Good news in Highgate bus stand saga

Transport for London’s Peter Hendy has agreed to a TfL making a site visit to discuss the vexed question of the location of Highgate Village’s main bus stand.

The solution I’m after is an extension of the vital 271 to East Finchley – so it connects better with other local services and East Finchley tube station. This would not only create more joined-up bus services, but would also allow the removal of the bus stand – greatly improving Pond Square. Better bus services and a better space for the community – it’d be a matter of win, win.

You can read more details of the story here and you can read the Hornsey Journal’s coverage of the story here.

Good news on the 210 bus

Excellent Photograhp of a bus lanenews has just come through about the 210 bus route – it’s going double-decker. That means more space on the buses, hurrah!

This will kick off on 16th February. It’s a shame that it has taken Transport for London so long to respond to the issue – but credit where credit is due, they have now.

Hornsey Central Hospital: the latest plans

Haringey PCT presented their update on Hornsey Hospital to a meeting yesterday. The good news (potentially) is that they have financial closure and the building will be built. The battle now is over what services get provided, which GPs will be based there, how local pharmacies will be impacted as they want a bit of a pharmacy on site, whether extra public transport can be provided (it is served only by one bus currently) and how all of this will be decided. Will consultation be wide and reach all users and stakeholders? And will we and our GPs be listened to?

It was an extremely robust meeting. The Better Local Healthcare Campaign group are extremely concerned that this is a privatisation of our health care. They raised the issue of the building actually being used for residential or commercial purposes. Richard Sumray, the Chair of Haringey PCT, denied this categorically and said whilst it had been in early proposals as alternatives – it had fallen as they had managed to find funding without the need for either of those proposals.

There is no doubt that there will be some private provision. That is Labour’s avowed proposition – that 15% of our health provision will come from the private sector. However, from what I could tell at the meeting, there is a fundamental commitment to this being and remaining an NHS service. I guess that we all have so little faith in what the Labour government tells us – especially because there have been so many varied incarnations of promises on Hornsey Hospital – that we are all concerned that what we are told may not be what happens.

My key issue is GP practices. The Trust is quite clear that some current GPs will have to move into the new, super-centre – otherwise it would not be viable. They deny absolutely that they are looking for a 50,000 patient list – but that they will commence with 15,000 rising to 25,000 years hence. Moreover – all practices will be able to use the new facilities – and thus a network of better health services will be provided locally.

My concern, which I raised pretty strongly, was that all the GPs and practices are really brought into the planning of this new facility. I have had reports from GPs of feeling pressured, being concerned that if they don’t move in or do what the Trust wants they will be punished financially and so on. So I asked the Chair about coercion, punishment, engagement etc with GPs and they absolutely promised that this (engagement, not punishment!) starts now. If they do work together – then this could be a real step forward. If the Trust steamrollers its way through and doesn’t listen to local people and GPs – it will be the opposite.

In terms of the concerns around local pharmacies in Crouch End being adversely affected – the Trust seems to be talking to them about them forming a collective to run the new pharmacy themselves. If this could come to fruition that would be a good way forward and an inclusive one. I haven’t heard recently from the local pharmacies – so I hope that it is as we were told at the meeting.

Lastly – transport. You couldn’t choose a worse placed site for lack of public transport. Only one bus now runs there. I have twice met with Peter Hendy, Commissioner of Transport in London on this issue – as the last thing we should be creating is more car journeys or poor access to such a facility for local people. On each occasion Peter has said – when it is a live project – let me know.

Well – with financial closure this is very live! And as my Lib Dem colleague Cllr Gail Engert (Muswell Hill) pointed out – it takes Transport for London a couple of years generally to get going on a new route (let alone the decade it took for the 603). So after the meeting I suggested to Richard that now is the moment to really push the transport aspect forward.

More generally – Richard Sumray has promised that over the coming weeks and months we will be given specifics and be consulted on this. I have over the recent weeks put out a health survey door to door (cos not everyone goes to these meetings or even hears about them) and part of the health survey is about what local people want at Hornsey Hospital. When they all come back – I will be feeding in the views to the Health Trust too.

Future of the 603 bus is at stake

Once more the long fought for, hard won – but still inadequate – 603 Muswell Hill to Swiss Cottage bus route is in the frame! Having met with Peter Hendy, Commissioner of Transport a couple of weeks ago – and harangued him over having more operating hours for the 603 (as I always do) – post meeting it transpired that a review is in train (or in bus to be more accurate).

So I have written to Peter Hendy as below – and would encourage everyone who agrees that the 603 should firstly be retained, and secondly have its hours of operations expanded to either write to me at House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA or email me at featherstonel@parliament.uk and I will pass on all responses to Peter Hendy.

They consult with stakeholders (local authority etc) but if you ask me – it’s the people who use or need this route who are the real stakeholders – so make sure you have your say too!

Dear Peter

At our recent meeting when I raised the issue extending the hours of operation of the 603 (as I always do!) you said that the route would be coming up for review and that you would let me know more about it. So I thank you for following up on that discussion – but – the information subsequently passed to me by your office alarmed me.

Far from ‘coming up for review’ it would seem that the 603 is actually under review at the moment. The message I received says that views of stakeholders have been sought already.

Views of stakeholders like the Local Authority and other organizations (which I assume are the sort of stakeholders referred to) are undoubtedly important – but surely in this case – where the route is a response to local peoples’ need (only met to a small extent by a school hours bus) – Transport for London would want to know from those local people what demand is there for both the existing hours and extensions to those hours.

I would like your assurance that no decisions will be taken before I have had the chance to inform my constituents of the review – and given them the opportunity to feed in their views. And I would like an assurance from you that you will take their views on board.

As you know, I believe that this service is highly valuable and personally believe it should be extended through the day and evening.

I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Lynne Featherstone MP
Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for Hornsey and Wood Green

Meeting Peter Hendy

Wednesday evening met with Peter Hendy, Commissioner of Transport for London. My three asks were: extending the 603 bus route to run all day and evening (as always); the transport issues around the new London Health Trust plans including the polyclinics (we need to ensure there are good public transport links for any such); and whether he would think about encouraging car clubs (where people share cars) via a congestion charge incentive.

So – number 1 – the 603 bus from Muswell Hill to Swiss Cottage. Well – the possibly good news is that it comes up for review next year. So our job is to make sure we feed into that review with thousands of requests to extend the operating hours from its current school run times only. People keep asking me about this – so we will have to ramp up our campaign again.

On number 2 – well it was interesting – because there are huge transport implications in the proposals to restructure health services. Firstly – the need to access in emergency for stroke, heart attack and major trauma the proposed super-specialist hospitals. Surely travel time trials from every part of London need to be done to establish the worst scenario time taken when traffic is bad and no air ambulance available? If we can’t get the victims to the right place in time – then this plan won’t work.

Secondly, the establishment of polyclinics – which are to serve up to 50,000 residents – may raise big transport issues. Will people be able to get to the polyclinics in reasonable time and at reasonable cost?

Peter was saying that this could be an issue and was going to arrange to meet with the Government to talk over the transport implications. Hurrah!

On number 3 – yes – Peter is considering how best to encourage the expansion of car clubs – so he agreed to look at the congestion charge in that regard – but I think any discount will be along the lines of discounts to people within the zone but not outside. Anyway – it is in and on his mind.

Update: you can read my article subsequent article about polyclinics here.

Parkland Walk: progress from Haringey Council

Mosey along to the ‘consultation’ on the plans for Parkland Walk. It would seem from the number of times that officers told me that the priority for the walk was its role as a nature reserve followed by a walk for pedestrians – that the message has got through from we local people.

The fear was that Haringey Council – in order to get the dosh from Transport for London (from their cycling department) – were going to turn Parkland Walk into a commuter cycle track. I had, subsequent to hearing local peoples’ concerns, got with a Freedom of Information request documentary evidence that indeed that was what the Parkland Walk money was for.

Having put this in the public domain and got loads and loads of people to give me their views on the then proposals (which I forwarded to the Council consultation), it would now seem from looking at today’s plans that the Council has taken note. Mainly the grant now seems to be being proposed to be used for improving access, patching paths, putting in drainage and introducing better signing.

It was still quite hard to tell what surface material they were proposing for the patching of the paths – as they displayed a range of about four – with no indiction of their favourites.

If the work goes ahead as displayed – outside of a bit of concern about the steps that will be replaced by ramps for cycles, wheelchairs and buggies – it looks OK.

So – fingers crossed!

Highbury and Islington station is set to be moved

A quick update on the saga of the Finsbury Park sign that puts Highbury & Islington on the Northern Line – Tim O’Toole from Transport for London has got back in touch with me:

Dear Lynne

I refer to your email dated 5 June and addressed to Peter Hendy. I have been asked to respond.

The sign is certainly misleading and the local Group Station Manager has arranged to have it amended.

The comment [on your blog] posted by Mr Mark Valladares, is indeed correct. The line from Finsbury Park to Moorgate was, until the 1970s, a spur ofthe Northern line. This is the type of quirk one finds on such an oldsystem and that is treasured by the cognoscenti. You are right toexpect us to eliminate such items, however.

Thank you for taking the time to contact us.

Yours sincerely

Tim O’Toole

Now that’s what I like – Tim O’Toole, hands on and dealing with it! Thanks Tim and all hail the power of the internet!

Encouraging practical alternatives to car ownership

Met Lynne Featherstone MP seeing how the Islington Streetcar street club workswith Streetcar. This is a car club. For those who don’t know – car clubs are just that. You become a member of the club and you can ‘buy’ access to a car, which will be stationed relatively near to you for an hourly, or 24 hour fee. It’s secured with a sort of version of the Oyster Card that unlocks the door – and then you have a pin number to feed into a gismo that removes the immobiliser and releases you the key to start it up.

There was one (well two actually) parked on the special on-street spaces reserved by the council in Islington (Lib Dem run of course!) for the car club – which is being enthusiastically backed by the council. Car clubs typically remove 20 private cars for each one of their cars. It is economic to the club member (only pay for a car when you need it), great for reducing congestion and car parking stress – and research amongst members demonstrates that people drive less miles per annum than they did when they owned their own car.

So – Cllr Ed Butcher (Lib Dem, Stroud Green) and I were meeting with Streetcar to see how they were progressing with breaking into the Haringey market. Opening gambits have been made – but I am sure Ed will be seeking to help them on their way. Transport for London gives funding to boroughs to promote the introduction of car clubs – so where there is money Haringey can be directed!