Skip to main content
Mayor of London logo London Assembly logo
Home

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [20]

  • Question by: Lynne Featherstone
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
I want to go back to your desire to fund the more deprived parts of London from the richer parts. Probably across the board, everyone agrees that deprived areas need parity of funding. But what I am scared of is the way in which that is developing in your strategies as an either/or, and formula is following funding. From what I have seen so far of the transport strategy and the spatial development strategy, the focus is on the deprivation. Great - but I know from Nicky's presentation in Haringey that there are many concerns about jumping on the opportunities...

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [19]

  • Question by: Roger Evans
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
Mr Mayor, could you tell me what the unemployment rate is in Woodford Bridge ward, please?

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [18]

  • Question by: Andrew Pelling
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
Then we can increase the services, can't we?

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [17]

  • Question by: Andrew Pelling
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
So can we reverse the current export of money from Croydon and Sutton to the London budget?

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [16]

  • Question by: Andrew Pelling
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
I am sure that we support your "abolish capital punishment" publicity programme, but you made the point to Len Duvall that you want equality of treatment. I can understand the anger, because the new Labour Government, after all, is a north country and Scottish party more than anything else, and it discriminates against London. If we are to have that equality of treatment, surely the same principle should apply within London as well, and I am rather concerned by what you say about the transfer of resources from rich parts of London to poor parts. Does south London count as...

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [15]

  • Question by: Lord Duvall of Woolwich in the Royal Borough of Greenwich OBE
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
You say, Mr Mayor, that you are going to run this campaign over the next three years, and you say whom you have been talking to. Some questions have been raised over the Carlton debate and the management of that. Questions have been raised by others about your style and the way you operate. Everyone accepts that you are the Mayor of London, and that you should take a lead, but what comfort do we have that you will not hi-jack the campaign for your own image projection rather than making the real case? What assurances are you going to...

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [14]

  • Question by: Lord Duvall of Woolwich in the Royal Borough of Greenwich OBE
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
So it is fair to say that London and south-east should, in theory, subsidise some poorer parts of the country?

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [13]

  • Question by: Lord Duvall of Woolwich in the Royal Borough of Greenwich OBE
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
Can you explain a bit more background, and help us to get behind some of the thinking in your manifesto? When did you stop believing in redistribution of wealth?

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [12]

  • Question by: Lord Duvall of Woolwich in the Royal Borough of Greenwich OBE
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
Many here would agree, but when the politics runs out, there may be less force in supporting the campaign. Could we move on to "barriers to effective partnership"? You said that partnership is the only way to do this. What do you think the barriers are to an effective coalition in this campaign?

Multiple Deprivation and Social Exclusion (Supplementary) [11]

  • Question by: Lord Duvall of Woolwich in the Royal Borough of Greenwich OBE
  • Meeting date: 20 June 2001
I did not quite get the answer: is it a fair deal for London that we are trying to achieve, or is it about branding the campaign as "London's being ripped off"? What are we trying to achieve?
Subscribe to