As the papers don't tell us anything I'll not put them on my del.icio.us stream, but you can see them here.

The two issues that were on his mind were transport and health. Transport first:

With change comes difficulty, as everybody knows. New stations are being fitted with the Oyster card system, which has been hugely successful on the underground network and on London buses. Extending it to the national rail network will be to the advantage of passengers throughout the area and the country, wherever it is adopted. Bringing in the Oyster card service means bringing in gates, which is where the current problem exists. There is a plan at Sydenham and Forest Hill stations to introduce over two phases and by the end of this year automatic gates, which will be brought on line while the Southern Trains franchise is still in existence.

Unfortunately, this is causing many of my constituents considerable inconvenience and has made their lives difficult because of restrictions on the up service from Sydenham and the down service from Forest Hill, requiring people to go to the other side of the station and back over footbridge to get to the service they want. For people with buggies or luggage or with mobility difficulties, that is extremely inconvenient. Everybody understands why the new system is being brought in, but it cannot be right to inconvenience the law-abiding and ticket-buying majority in the hope of catching the fare-evading minority. My constituents certainly do not see it that way.

He goes on to say he, Sir Steve and the public are asking for Southern Trains to revert to the older system until they bring in the whole scheme and apparently Southern are thinking about it.

On health he says:

I applaud the PCTs for taking a joint approach to planning important services in the area. The last time I spoke on this issue was at the start of the consultation period. Fortunately, within the last few weeks, that consultation has concluded. The one thing that became apparent beyond all others was that the people of Lewisham do not regard themselves as living in outer south-east London, whatever that might be. If services at Lewisham hospital are taken away, the people would be more likely to go to King's in the west or Guy's and St Thomas' in the north than they would ever be to go to Queen Elizabeth in Woolwich, Princess Royal in Farnborough or Queen Mary in Sidcup.

I am delighted that the result of the consultation has been to underline, rather than undermine, the services provided by Lewisham hospital. It is good news for Lewisham residents. The confidence and respect of residents for University hospital in Lewisham has been confirmed by the exercise and by the PCT. The joint PCT accepted that it will continue with the world class maternity and, certainly, paediatric services, which are among the best in the country—as good as Great Ormond street, according to the Healthcare Commission, or better, as Great Ormond street does not provide a children's A & E service but Lewisham does.

Cross posted from Love Perry Vale

What a warm, sharing, caring Council we all are! (For now, I'm just talking about the councillors - please don't give me 000's of comments about anyone else!)

Political party differences aside, we all agreed about almost everything! Sadly though, talking mostly to ourselves with nobody on the press table and very few people (not even Max!) in the public gallery. We congratulated Lieutenant Colonel Conrad Graham, who's retiring after seventeen years as Lewisham's Deputy Lieutenant. The main 'business' item was the Community Safety Strategy - Lewisham is deadly serious about what we can do, and what we need the Police to do, to tackle violent crime locally - even though overall levels of all crimes are down since 1997.

Then we all wished Nelson Mandela a Happy Birthday on Friday - with Mayor Steve not forgetting to mention the partnership Lewisham has with Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality, and other ways we've supported democracy in South Africa since years back.

Then, we all agreed with the LibDems' motion that Southern Railways were "not very good at doing what their customers want" (I paraphrase lots of rhetoric here, partly to censor the rather more explicit feelings expressed, which probably won't make it into the polite official minutes either ;->) in locking up station gates. I did point out that the LibDems had nearly missed this particular bandwaggon train, coming at it so late when councillors in Sydenham and Perry Vale (where people are most affected by the Oystergate fiasco) and the Sydenham and Forest Hill societies have been grappling with the rail companies over many months now. So they accepted the amendment from me and Cllr Chris Best - so that we didn't look silly by "demanding that the Mayor.." do - what he's already doing (see this Friday's event at Forest Hill station).

The only thing we didn't agree about was a bit of school debating society stuff from Cllr Maines (who likes his own voice a lot, and would like to be an MP) about how, although we all thought it was great that the NHS was 60 years old and going strong, it was a shame the Government had managed to get so much money invested in it through partnerships with the private sector - which it's done since 1948 anyway, because GPs (and lots of other medical services) have always been independent. Cllr Barry Anderson (Chair of the Council) did a fine bit of stern chairing in shutting-up Cllr Feakes - who also likes making long speeches.

How can you explain to politicians that nobody cares about them on the website?

I'd say that if Lewisham's website is anything to go by, then surely most of the politicians know that the council's already come to that conclusion.

The answer is surely to tell them to get out there and make their own websites that do interest the public.

But, and here's the rub, councils then ought to do much more to promote what their politicians are saying and doing. That's not just what the executive are about, but what the scrutiny committes are up to, what councillors do in their wards, and the debates that happen in council.

It's up to the councillors to provide decent content, but the council should be able to find ways of drawing attention to what they're about.

Cross posted from Love Perry Vale.

Strategic Planning committee last night (agenda here), with the main item being the massive new New Deal for Communities development for the Kender Triangle at New Cross Gate. In contrast to the usually expected crowd of objectors (often to much smaller developments than this) there was a busload (literally - they parked their bus outside) of supporters - enthusiastically wearing their campaign t-shirts and cheering on the architect and Councillor Robin Cross (the only local ward councillor who seems to have bothered to get involved with the project) when they made speeches to the committee explaining the benefits of the scheme for the area. After the meeting we found them still outside the Town Hall, taking group photos to record the occasion. There was an objector, and he made some valid points - but on issues which (we decided) could be resolved by negotiation with the developers and Planning officers. Our poor senior Highways engineer had laryngitis, so we were kind and only asked him questions he could nod or shake his head to. We had some discussion about making sure the mix of rented, shared-ownership and privately-sold flats (173 altogether, along with a new public library, doctor's surgery, nursery and public open spaces) is all managed well and in ways that don't discriminate against the 'social' housing residents. But we agreed unanimously that it was a great piece of design, and gave it permission. I'll look forward to seeing, one day, the big red 10-storey tower going up there, and thinking "I helped that to happen".

John Muldoon, one of the councillors for Rushey Green, has created the Rushey Green Herald, strapline "passionate about Rushey Green".

So, if you're a Rushey Green resident then you may want to join up.

Hopefully Ray, one of the members there, won't mind be nicking one of his photos from the Blythe Hill Festival, particularly as it features Richard doing his thing.

Cross posted from Love Perry Vale with John Paschoud's permission:

We had a private meeting of the Council's Planning committee Chairs tonight, with Cllr Heidi Alexander (who has Planning amongst her Cabinet portfolio), John Miller (the chief Planning officer) and the Planning officers who normally give us advice at committee meetings.

The issue is that some meetings do seem to be lasting a long time, whilst others have very few or very quick cases to deal with. I still think I hold both of the - unofficial - Lewisham records, for conducting the longest (until way after the pubs closed, at 11pm then) and the shortest (about 7 minutes, I think) Planning meetings.

We considered delegating more decisions (those that could be made on purely technical grounds) to officers - but they already deal with about 94% of the workload! - so we're not going to do that. I think this is one reason why some people have the (definitely false) impression that "the Council is in cahoots with developers, because they pass nearly all the planning applications they get". That's because you don't see most of the ones that get refused - they never see the light of day at a public meeting! I suggested (not completely seriously) that we could publish a sort-of rogues gallery of the proposals to build really outrageous things that have been refused permission... but that would probably just attract lawyers!

The Council is supposed to "work in partnership" with developers, and actually our officers are quite good at negotiating with them to produce proposals that are generally acceptable, so that's another reason why more that emerge as formal applications are approved, than are refused. (Correspondingly, the Council involves amenity societies quite extensively in the process of drafting new policies on which decisions are based.)

In the end we've decided to improve the training for councillors who're members of Planning committees, so they don't spend (so much) time discussing "non-planning issues" (which can't be reasons to refuse an application). And to try changing the way each case is heard so that we hear the officer's impartial advice first, and then the contributions from applicant and objectors. We'll see if that gets us all home any earlier...

John has kindly given me permission to do this with other posts of his, so you may see more of his thoughts here in future.

“That this council notes that in 2007 nearly 20,000 households were on Lewisham's housing register and that 3332 families were living in overcrowded accommodation in the borough, as of 31 January 2008; recognises the devastating impact that poor housing conditions can have on an individual's health and ability to succeed at school or in the job market; welcomes the importance attached to providing affordable housing in Lewisham's sustainable community strategy and the draft local area agreement; calls upon the Mayor to propose a 50% affordable housing target for new development in the council's emerging planning policies as well as a 35% target for affordable family homes (3 bed or larger) as per the London Housing Federation's "Think Big" report.”

1. To ask the Secretary of State for Health what measures are under consideration by his Department to ensure that strategic health authorities meet their service level agreement commitments regarding multi-professional education and training. [answer]
2. To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will undertake to restore the underspend by strategic health authorities on multi-professional education and training, with particular reference to nurse training for each of the last five years for which there has been an underspend. [answer]
3. To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps his Department is taking to ensure that strategic health authorities spend their full budget allocation on nurse training. [answer]

• Continue investing to transform London's transport system - continue improving bus services, modernise the Tube, build Crossrail and improve London rail services through London Overground to raise service and safety standards, while holding down fares
• Continue the six per cent reduction in crime each year - add a further 1,000 police over the next year to London's existing record police numbers and maintain a dedicated police team in every neighbourhood
• Safeguard the policy that 50 per cent of new homes should be cheaper homes to buy and homes at affordable rents; build a minimum fifty thousand new affordable homes in the next three years
• Introduce 24 hour operation of the Freedom Pass - giving older and disabled Londoners free travel before 9am and throughout the day
• Extend the student travel discount to Oyster One Day Travelcards; maintain free travel for under-18s on the buses
• A £25 a day charge for high carbon-emitting gas guzzlers to enter the central London congestion zone and no charge for the greenest cars, with a London-wide Low Emission Zone to keep the worst polluting lorries out of London
• Maintain good community relations - continue to reduce racist attacks, down more than fifty per cent over eight years
• Youth centres for our young people - a £78m programme to set up youth centres and improve youth services throughout London to provide safe facilities outside school hours

More detail on Ken's site, and more about Len here.

On their Proud of Lewisham page they say:

We're proud because Lewisham represents whats best about Britain - that our tolerance, respect and diversity make our borough a great and strong community to live in. We know we need to work hard to maintain and develop our community, and that people want to feel safe and proud of the areas they live in.

People often say, we want more of a sense of community, and Labour in Lewisham agree. We want to build a strong sense of identity so that our community is strengthened by a common bond. Thats why we make a great effort to get behind those who do make a difference, and go the extra mile to bring people together, whether its our citizenship ceremonies, our celebration of Lewishams armed forces, our work with young people and community groups, or the local assemblies - all across our borough people are getting involved and making a difference.

There's lots of content carried over from the old site (with the added extra of an RSS feed) and the promise of a blog too (though no RSS for that at the moment).

In an attempt to show that I've got too much time on my hands this morning I've set up a del.icio.us account and bookmarked the Mayor and Cabinet papers for 5 March.  That means you can - should you have an interest in these things - get the RSS feed.

I've also attempted to tag the papers so that it should be possible to search for things over time.

It's a bit of a chore doing it this way so whether I'll continue to do it will depend in part on whether I can find the time, and whether people think it's of use.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what consideration he has given to making the decisions of employment tribunals available free-of-charge on the internet.

Bridget Prentice:

The Tribunals Service has decided to delay providing Employment Tribunal (ET) judgments on the internet until Caseflow (the computerised ET case management system) is developed and rolled out across the regional ET offices. Once installed, Caseflow will make it easier and more resource efficient to upload judgements automatically to the ET website. Caseflow will be piloted this autumn and national rollout will depend on the results of the pilot.

(via They Work for You)

When I was re-elected in 2006 I promised you that I would hold increases in the council tax to 2.5% each year. I have again been able to keep that pledge this year and last week the Council accepted my budget proposal. Once the GLA precept is taken into account bills will go up by only 2.37%.

In the face of one of the most difficult budgets of recent years we have been able to able to maintain the Council’s high quality 4 star services as well as spend £7m more on in caring for the most vulnerable people in our community, the elderly and those with disabilities. .

Jim Dowd (Lewisham West, Labour):

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what assessment she has made of the provision of connections to street-lighting in inner London by EDF; what estimate she has made of the time taken by EDF to reconnect street lights in inner London in the latest period for which figures are available; and if she will hold discussions with (a) EDF and (b) other companies providing connections to street lighting on steps to be taken to expedite connection times.

Malcolm Wicks (Minister of State (Energy), Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform)

I have been asked to reply.

In October 2007, Ofgem introduced a set of key performance indicators with regard to connections and faults repairs for street lighting services. DNOs are required to report on their performance in respect of each local authority against a number of criteria and meet those criteria in 90 per cent. of instances overall. Performance against criteria will be published by Ofgem annually.

Ofgem has received one quarterly return under the new requirements (for the three months ending 31 December 2007). The figures for EDF Energy (London Power Networks) show:

Ofgem will discuss both aggregate figures shown above for the first quarter and performance within each local Public Lighting Authority (PLA) area with EDFE. Ofgem also considers feedback received from PLAs at various forums and will take up specific issues with DNO management when necessary.

The Green Room blog says:

Green Party councillor Romayne Phoenix warned today that local children could be targeted by police Taser squads on Lewisham's streets.

The way I read that sentence and the story that follows is that Romayne thinks there are police men and women who will be briefed in Lewisham police station to go out and find children to shoot with the tasers.

I've been reading the new ACPO guidance on how the police should work with children and young people and that sort of response didn't seem to me to be the one that the association were looking to engender.

I've emailed Romayne to check that her views have been acurately reflected on the blog and await her response.

Our politicians say:

As your Labour elected representatives in Lewisham, we all agree that we have a responsibility to ensure that Lewisham residents continue to enjoy the best Health Care the NHS can provide.

Our starting point is simple. We all understand that the options set out in "A Picture of Health" would lead to changes in the services provided at University Hospital Lewisham (UHL) and in-patient maternity services, paediatrics and the Accident and Emergency department would be at risk.

We agree with the clinicians view outlined in the report that patients should be treated closer to their homes and that this should be coupled with developing hospital based homes services and urgent care centres as soon as possible.

However, we strongly disagree with the assumption that Lewisham belongs in Outer South East London an area "coined" by the "Picture of Health" consultation documents. This is a fundamental error and would be at odds with our residents' sense of where they live.

We strongly assert that we are part of the inner South East quadrant of London and identify far more with our neighbouring boroughs Southwark and Lambeth. We think that our residents would identify far more with Kings and St Thomas's when seeking out their health care needs and making their choices.
We will also argue for keeping an Accident and Emergency service in Lewisham capable of dealing with all cases except those requiring highly specialised care; the retention of the excellent regional paediatric unit and the retention of doctor led maternity care, while also seeking to improve safety for mothers and babies and addressing significant staff shortages in this area.

All residents who share our concerns about the future of Hospital services in Lewisham are encouraged to respond to this consultation by the 7th April.

My understanding is that all of the political parties represented on the council take a broadly similar view, but I'm happy to stand corrected should that not be the case.

Should you want to go an make your case to the NHS in person they are holding a drop in session on 28th February between 2pm and 8pm at Lewisham Methodist Church Hall on Albion Way, SE13 6BT.

I also know that the council's Health Select Committee (working with their scrutiny colleagues across the consultation area) will be looking at the proposals as part of their statutory duty to examine significant changes to health provision.

Whether they will be calling for evidence isn't clear from my attempts to find out what they're doing through the council's website - which seems to be temporarily out of action as I write.

I receive a healthy postbag from constituents and take up a lot of casework and issues for residents if they are raised with me. I work with individual Members of Parliament on GLA related matters or where my help has been requested. I have regular dealings with the Leader of Greenwich, the Mayor of Lewisham and local councillors in both boroughs.

One of my duties as a member of the GLA is to chair meetings of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) where things like where our local police teams operate and what their priorities should be are decided. The MPA is the organisation that scrutinises and supports the work of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The MPA also sets policing targets and monitors performance regularly against those targets and it oversees the appointment and discipline of senior police officers and be accountable for the management of the police budget.

I wonder whether I see the hand of Jon Worth in the design.

Top story at the moment is about the additional police presence in the borough.  Steve says:

Crime is everyone’s top concern and it’s important that we all do more to create a safer community. That’s why an extra 12 new Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) have been patrolling the streets of New Cross, Brockley, Lewisham and Catford since the beginning of the summer. In the last seven years, residents have seen 48 more police officers and 88 more PCSOs out and about in the borough.

He's also got a poll what our priority would if there was £1 million to spend on council services.  Currently out in the lead is "things for young people to do", so if you don't think that's the thing then go vote for something else.

I am delighted to have the opportunity to raise a couple of matters of particular concern to my constituents, although they have wider implications across south London. If I have time, I will refer to a third matter.

Earlier this year, I secured an Adjournment debate on the future of Network Rail services into London Bridge station following the welcome and long overdue extension of the East London line through my constituency to Crystal Palace and West Croydon. I do not intend to reprise the whole of that debate now, but I will make one point that I made then. The London borough of Lewisham has the highest proportion of residents who work outside the borough of any of the London boroughs. Therefore, the public transport links into and out of Lewisham are crucial to my constituents and others.

I sought in that debate to get an assurance that current Network Rail services would be augmented by East London line services and that there would be no cut in the current level of service, which is already extremely overcrowded. Although everyone welcomes the extension of the East London line and the extended opportunities that that will give for changes in travel patterns, on many occasions people cannot even get on the trains that go through the stations in my constituency. The frequency does not matter if by the time they get to Honor Oak, for example, they cannot get on the train. I sought a number of assurances, which the Minister was not able to give in full. However, the Minister certainly made some welcome comments.

Since then, the route utilisation study for south London has been concluded. Such studies are taking place throughout the country. I am sure that they are taking place in the constituencies of many Members present. The route utilisation study for south London has been published for consultation. The outline draft is before us. It is necessarily a weighty document: it is well over 200 pages, it is very technical and has numerous charts, graphs and tables. It will form the background not just for the extended East London line in 2010 but for the franchise renewal, which comes up in 2009.

The franchise is currently held by Southern. I do not know whether it will be successful again. I do not even know whether it will tender. I suspect that it will, which will be good news for people in my constituency, because it took over from the late, lamented Connex, which had the franchise taken away from it. Services have improved markedly. As I say, there is huge pressure in my constituency on the rail services going south on the loop line into London Bridge and Victoria stations.

The route utilisation study is not readily comprehensible to those who do not understand how railway timetabling is done. During the Adjournment debate earlier this year, I mentioned a few community groups in my constituency. I pay tribute to them again for the work that they have done in trying to interpret the implications of the options outlined in the study. However, I have concluded that the reasoning in that was at variance with my own and certainly at variance with the various undertakings and assurances that I was given by Network Rail, Southern, Transport for London and the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, South (Mr. Harris), who is responsible for rail, and his officials. There seems to be concern in the constituency that services into London Bridge station will be reduced from eight trains to six during the rush hour and that loop services between London Bridge and Clapham Junction into Victoria will be abolished.

I was therefore delighted to receive an e-mail from Network Rail. I will read part of it because I would like to get it on the record to reassure my constituents. It says:

"Network Rail has some concerns about a number of factually incorrect comments about the South London RUS which are currently in circulation and which may be causing...unnecessary worry.

Some of the issues which concern us, and which we would like to clarify are as follows:

It is not true to state that 'the draft RUS would result in a 25 per cent. cut in existing Sydenham Line peak period services to London Bridge. The draft RUS proposals for December 2009 would in fact:

Result in exactly the same number of trains as today from Sydenham/Forest Hill arriving at London Bridge between 0700 and 1000 on weekdays"

and

"Result in an increase from today in the number of trains from Anerley, Penge West, Honor Oak Park and Brockley arriving at London Bridge between 0700 and 1000 on Weekdays".

It goes on:

"It is not true to state that the draft RUS proposes an even greater cut in off-peak services from Sydenham to London Bridge. The draft RUS makes no comment whatever on the level of off-peak services to London Bridge. It is also not true to state that the draft RUS proposals will result in the loss of the loop line service to Clapham junction and Victoria."

I was very heartened to receive that from Network Rail and obviously my constituents will be pleased as well. However, the proof of the pudding will be when the East London line arrives in 2010.

The utilisation study is out for consultation and should be finalised by March. It then goes to the Office of Rail Regulation and finally to the Department for Transport. I hope that all the bodies involved will process it in exactly the way that Network Rail intends and that the East London line in 2010 will be a genuine and very welcome addition—particularly to someone who has been campaigning for the extension of the East London line for 35 years—to the area and to the people of my constituency.

Another recent consultation, which was published only yesterday, is called "A Picture of Health" and is a joint venture by Bexley, Bromley, Greenwich and Lewisham primary care trusts, with the involvement of West Kent PCT. The study is looking at the acute sector within south-east London and outer west Kent. It has been augmented by Sir George Alberti, head of the national clinical advisory team. It is called, rather mistakenly in my estimation, the outer south-east London study. That is something of a misnomer, because University hospital, Lewisham is certainly not in outer London. However, it seems easier to deal with it in that way, rather than looking to the west and north to St. Thomas's and King's.

The great advantage of the variety of proposals that the study makes is that they are clinically led. A number of them—intermediate and hospital-based home services and urgent care centres—make admirable sense and the sooner they are advanced, the better. Many of them are not new and have been suggested for many years. However, the PCT and its predecessors were unable to put a funding framework in place. I hope that urgent progress will be made.

Many of the proposals deserve praise—as the consultation was published only yesterday, this is an early opportunity to make my views known—but some options should be ruled out immediately. Any suggestion to relocate the excellent paediatric facilities at Lewisham—a regional centre offering care of the highest quality—would be a severe mistake. There is no need to do that and, as the phrase has it, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Any suggestion that the accident and emergency facility at Lewisham should be downgraded or modified is completely misplaced. If it were not there, there would be nothing between St. Thomas's, King's and Farnborough to the south and Woolwich to the east. That is entirely unacceptable and would result in great dislocation. Hardly any of my constituents—hardly anyone in Lewisham—would use Woolwich and Farnborough and the pressure already on St. Thomas's and King's would simply be increased. The A and E at Lewisham is regularly busier than at King's, a hospital with three times the number of beds, and is occasionally busier than St. Thomas's. It would be an act of utmost folly to downgrade or modify it. I look forward to the consultation and hope that it will be to the benefit of everybody across south London.

Finally, I want to refer to an internet service provider that is failing to provide. Many right hon. and hon. Members will recall Freeserve, which was the dominant provider of internet services. In the end, it was acquired by Wanadoo and then went to Orange. During that time, people kept their e-mail addresses but were provided with services by Wanadoo and then by Orange—until a few months ago. This matter only came to my attention over the weekend.

Orange was taken over by France Telecom. I am sure that this has nothing to do with the fact that it is France Telecom, but surreptitiously and without warning long-established e-mail services are being disconnected. I am not even sure whether the company has the legal right to do that, because, effectively, it is taking people's information or data and refusing them access to it. One can still send e-mails to the address that Orange has now blocked. People send mail in all good faith, assuming it has got through, but it has not, simply because of the capricious and disgraceful actions of Orange.

I know, as many hon. Members do, that Orange has a sophisticated lobbying organisation. There are many sessions for Members to discuss issues. I have been to a few and Orange is very generous with its hospitality; one can go out on the Terrace at its expense. Orange should take into account the fact that people have a right to be told, if nothing else. People may let Orange put them on to a new contract to screw money out of them—that is what these organisations do—but it is plain stupidity not to tell them what is going on . It should end this reprehensible behaviour as soon as possible.

As at least one community group has been given chapter and verse on using trees as a place to put up notices; and I'm told that one very senior officer has been reminded of council policy recently too, much to his/her embarrassment.

But it looks like Brockley councillors may need a bit of 're-education' if this is anything to go by. ;-)

Rooting around their website I found a video of her speech at the last annual meeting which I thought some of you might be interested in.  (Hopefully if you click on the picture you should be able to download the video.)

In it Madeliene explains the governance arrangements for members of the Trust, and exhorts people to become members of SlaM (apparently there are 3,000 already and its free).

Madeliene also takes those present through the agenda for the meeting touching on the increased focus on wellbeing, and becoming happy and then handing on to the Chief Executive of the Trust, Stuart Bell.

Also worth taking a look at is a video about young people's mental health produced by the Children's Society called You're Not Alone.

Joan Ruddock, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for the Environment, will be hosting the meeting and making a presentation.

Further details and to confirm your place via Mike Smith on 020 7219 4513 or smithmi@parliament.uk.

Joan

Constituency 

At the end of September I visited the Job Centre on Deptford High Street. They are doing excellent work and have helped over 800 people to get into work over the past year.

I also visited Pepys Community Forum waste recycling project. This is a really innovative local project. The group collect food waste from the Pepys estate and take dry recyclables and the food to an accelerated composter at their nearby facility. The compost produced will be used in the community in future. I t’s an excellent example of how we can turn everyday waste into a useful resource, rather than simply dumping it.

On 30th September I visited the Lewisham Somali Community Organisation in Deptford. I spoke with staff and pupils about the supplementary school classes in Maths, English, Somali and Arabic run by the organization to help the Somali Community integrate into the local society. They also hold classes to specifically help women in the Somali community.

Ministerial 

On 14th September I was in Nottingham as part of the Government’s Act on CO2 roadshow talking to the public on how we can all act to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.

During the same visit I toured an Eco Houses project illustrating new technologies to reduce the carbon footprint of housing. We will need to fully embrace technologies such as these if we are to avoid the worst effects
of climate change and I was delighted to hear Gordon Brown announce during Conference the doubling of the number of ‘eco towns’ which will be built.

I was invited to London Fashion Week to tour the stalls promoting sustainable clothing on 17th September. I was amazed to see beautiful garments made of flax and bamboo – much better even than organic cotton
because less water is added and they grow in cooler climates. Defra has a whole section dedicated to sustainable consumption and production which is doing very interesting work.

I met with Ken Livingstone to discuss waste issues in London on 19th Sept. London’s waste is a major issue and I’m very keen to progress on this issue by working with Ken.

In September I launched the Climate Change Champions competition. This is a nationwide search for 9 young people to spread the message about the challenge of tackling global warming and what people can do to reduce
emissions. The winners of the competition will spend a year 'in office' communicating their ideas and leading their own regional public awareness campaigns.

On 2nd October I’m in Paris discussing carbon capture and storage technologies. These technologies could limit our CO2 emissions by capturing the carbon released from burning fossil fuels in power stations and storing it to prevent it escaping into the atmosphere. The meeting is a Defra EU-China event and so quite a responsibility!