The Greater London Authority’s Monitoring Officer,
City Hall,
The Queen’s Walk,
London SE1 2AA
Wednesday 8 January 2014
Complaint against Mayor Boris Johnson for breach of the Code of Conduct of the Greater London Authority
We the undersigned, being retired senior officers previously employed by the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, call on the GLA Monitoring Officer to formally investigate our complaint that Boris Johnson, in the course of his duties as Mayor of London, has breached the GLA’s Code of Conduct and has failed to behave in accordance with the Principles of Public Life, which are part of the GLA Code of Conduct.
Our complaint is supported by evidence that on repeated occasions the Mayor has lied about the impact of the proposed reductions to London’s fire cover caused by the £45m in budget cuts he is imposing on the LFEPA over two years. The Fifth London Safety Plan, adopted by the LFEPA on 12 September, would:
- Close ten London fire stations, with the loss of 12 fire engines
- Remove the second fire engine from seven two-engine fire stations (and add a second fire engine at five one-engine fire stations)
- Cause the loss of 552 frontline firefighter jobs and 36 senior officer jobs
- Scrap the Fire Rescue Units at Millwall and Hornchurch
When he attempts to justify the cuts, the Mayor repeatedly claims that fire cover in London will be improved despite the closure of fire stations, that he will “keep response times up” and that there have been “steady” and “sustained” reductions in deaths from fire in recent years. None of these claims are true. The evidence that the Mayor has repeatedly made statements that are untrue is in the attached document: “Supporting evidence: Code breach complaint against Mayor Boris Johnson, 25 September 2013”
Boris Johnson has repeated his inaccurate claims about the cuts so regularly that they appear to be based on a planned script of statements the Mayor believes he can get away with. When challenged on the facts, the Mayor tries to bluster his way through any question and throws up
a smokescreen of jokes, diversions and other avoidance tactics, including verbal abuse of the questioner.
The Mayor’s behaviour amounts to a campaign of lies and disinformation which is designed to mislead Londoners about the real impact of his cuts plan. This has undermined the ability of Londoners to respond to the consultation on the Fifth London Safety Plan on the basis of accurate information.
At events such as Mayor’s Question Time and ‘Ask The Mayor,’ Boris Johnson has given untruthful answers to questions and been rude and condescending to firefighters and GLA members who have raised genuine concerns about the increased risk of death and injury in fire.
At Mayor’s Question Time on 19 June 2013 Boris Johnson shouted: “Get lost!” and “Clear off!” at firefighters and members of the public. At Mayor’s Question Time on 11 September 2013 Boris Johnson answered questions by saying: “Get stuffed,” and “Bollocks.”
Separately, the Mayor failed to attend any of the 24 public consultation meetings organised by the LFEPA.
We believe that as Mayor of London, Boris Johnson should have taken a more serious and respectful approach to the concerns of Londoners about the risk of fire, and in particular the slower response times for fire and rescue services that will be caused by his cuts. We believe that the misleading and inaccurate statements made by the Mayor can only be described as lies, and that this behaviour has brought the Mayor’s office into disrepute.
The Mayor is in breach of the following sections of the GLA’s Code of Conduct:
3. (1) You must treat others with respect.
5. You must not conduct yourself in a manner which could reasonably be regarded as bringing your office or authority into disrepute.
Accountability: Holders of public office are accountable for their decisions and actions to the public and must submit themselves to whatever scrutiny is appropriate to their office.
Openness: Holders of public office should be as open as possible about all the decisions and actions that they take. They should give reasons for their decisions and restrict information only when the wider public interest clearly demands.
We ask for your guidance about what action you think would be appropriate to resolve our complaint.
Yours,
[SIGNATURES]
Attached: Supporting evidence
Supporting evidence: Code breach complaint against Mayor Boris Johnson
Mayor Boris Johnson has based his campaign to close 10 London fire stations and cut more than 580 frontline firefighters’ job on three carefully crafted messages. The Mayor claims that there has been a “sustained” or “steady” decline in deaths from fire. He claims that the first fire engine will arrive within the six minute target response time in “more parts of London.” And before his re-election in May 2008 he claimed that: “Under this Mayor there will be absolutely no reduction in fire cover.” All three of these claims are untrue.
The lie about declining fire deaths
“Just since I have been Mayor there has been a colossal reduction in deaths by fire and incidence of fire.”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 17 July 2013
“Londoners are seeing steady reductions in deaths from fire”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 19 June 2013
“There’s been a sustained reduction in deaths from fire over the last 10 years.”
Boris Johnson, Ask The Mayor, Central Hall Westminster, 12 June 2013
“I will look forward to continuing reductions in incidents, fires and fire death”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 22 May 2013
“Our shared ambition is to make sure we keep reducing deaths by fire in London and keep improving fire cover in this city.”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time 19 December 2012
Boris Johnson justifies the current proposal to close 10 London fire stations by claiming there is a steady decline in the number of fire deaths in London.
This is untrue. There has been an increase in the trend rate of annual deaths in fires in London over the five years since Boris Johnson was elected as Mayor in May 2008.
“Just since I have been Mayor there has been a colossal reduction in deaths by fire and incidence of fire.” Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 17 July 2013
There were 14 deaths in fires in the first quarter of the current financial year (2013/14), equivalent to 56 over 12 months, suggesting that the trend rate for annual deaths in fires will remain upward.
In the revised Fifth London Safety Plan published on Wednesday 10 July, Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson is careful not to repeat the Mayor’s claim that there is a ‘steady’ or ‘sustained’ fall in the annual number of fire deaths. Instead, Commissioner Dobson says: “annually the numbers will fluctuate.” (Page 25, LSP5 July 2013)
Although there was asteep one-year fall in deaths from fire between 2003/04 and 2004/05 before Boris Johnson became Mayor, therehas since been anincrease in the trend rate of fatalities, both under LSP1 & 2 (2004/05 to 2007/08) and under LSP3 & 4 (2008/09 to 2012/13).
This was under the London Fire Brigade’s current station numbers and staffing levels.
Speaking at the ‘Ask The Mayor’ event at Central Hall Westminster on 12 June, Boris Johnson said:
“In the last 10 years deaths from fire have been cut, or incidents of fire have been cut by 50 per cent, deaths from fire have come down by a third, they came down by 18 per cent just in the last four years.”
The figures quoted by the Mayor do not appear to be related in any way to the LFEPA’s published record for deaths in fire.
At Mayor’s Question Time on 11 September 2013, Boris Johnson said:
“There are shouts from the gallery saying that the number of fatalities has not gone down. I am afraid you are completely wrong. That is not true, that is not true, that’s bollocks.”
The shouts from the gallery, recorded on the webcast of Mayor’s Question Time, were that the number of fire deaths since Boris Johnson was elected in 2008 has been going up.
In a very ill-advised response, the Mayor then read out numbers for fire deaths for each calendar year since 2000. But the numbers he read out proved the hecklers were right.
Since Boris Johnson was elected as Mayor in May 2008, the average annual number of deaths in fires has slightly increased. The annual figures are:
Financial year2008-0938Calendar year200841
2009-1064 2009 55
2010-1161 2010 60
2011-1247 2011 56
2012-1348 2012 44
The lie about better fire cover
“What I have said, and I do not think you can contradict this, is that we are bringing more boroughs within the target response times, both for the first and the second appliance. Are you going to contradict that? Are you going to?”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 17 July 2013
“What we are doing is bringing more parts of London within the minimum journey times both for the first and second fire appliance.”
Boris Johnson, Ask The Mayor, Central Hall Westminster, 12 June 2013
These statements are untrue. No boroughs will be brought within the minimum response time of under six minutesfor the arrival of the first fire engine at a fire.
The Mayor’s claims in verbal statements may be based on borough-wide averages that have not counted the actual street and ward areas that will be brought within the target response times.
But in a written answer drafted by officials for Mayor’s Question Time on 17 July, Boris Johnson was forced to admit that not one council ward in London is being brought within the six minute target response time for the first fire engine to arrive:
“Based on the Commissioner’s draft plan published in January 2013, 40 wards currently within the 1st appliance 6 minute target will go outside the target joining the 267 wards that are currently performing outside target. No ward outside of the 1st appliance target would come within it.”
Boris Johnson, Written Answer, Mayor’s Question Time, 17 July 2013
Under the revised LSP5 plan published on 10 July, 38 wards will move from a response time below six minutes to a response time that misses the six minute target. These wards have a total population of 436,636.
The Mayor’s statements about the impact of LSP5 are contradicted by the LFEPA’s published forecast of how fire and rescue response times will change in London’s 649 council wards. These show that across London the cuts will lead to slower response times for nearly three times as many Londoners as will gain from reduced response times.
More than 3,476,000 people live in wards that will get slower response times while 1,265,120 people live in wards forecast to have faster response times. There are onlyfive boroughs out of 33 where more people gain than either lose or experience no change: Barnet, Brent, Bromley, Harrow, and Richmond.
The LFEPA says there is a link between the risk of household fires and deprivation indicators. But in the 100 most deprived wards in London, a million Londoners (997,110) will see their first appliance attendance time worsen while only 34,000 people living in these wards will see an improvement in their attendance times.
The lie about his plans
"Under this Mayor there will be absolutely no reduction in fire cover and we will continue to make London a safer city."
Boris Johnson, Mayor's Budget Speech, 25 January 2012
“The reassurance that people can take from me and from LFEPA is that we will not do anything to degrade the London fire cover we have in London, quite the reverse.”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 21 November 2012
“I will make sure that we take steps to protect fire cover in London and make sure we have the officers, the fire fighters we need that do a fantastic job and can keep incidents of fire and death from fire coming down and keep response times up.”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 19 December 2012
The Mayor’s manifesto for the 2012 election made no mention of these cuts, or the fire station closures and reduction in cover they would require.
The only mention of the London Fire Brigade in the Mayor’s manifesto was that it was working on reducing CO2 emissions and that it would participate in the Mayor’s paid internship scheme.
Yet only five months after he was elected on this manifesto, Mayor Johnson’s plans to close up to 17 stations emerged.
When challenged about his pre-election promises by London Assembly Member Andrew Dismore at Mayor’s Question Time on 11 September 2013, Boris Johnsonlost his temper and responded “Oh, get stuffed,” and “That is what you said last time you ‘cowardy’ custard.”
After another question from London Assembly Member John Biggs, the Mayor said: “Just guff.”
Are the closures driven by the Mayor’s budget cuts or by the Fire Commissioner’s assessment of reduced fire risk in London?
The Mayor has consistently tried to duck responsibility for the closures and staffing reductions by saying that LSP5 was drawn up by London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson.
“What I take seriously is the view of those who consecrate their lives to fighting fire in our city and who say ‘actually it isn’t a question of cash, this is a question of what is the best disposition, what is the best configuration of fire services in London?’ ”
Boris Johnson, Mayor’s Question Time, 17 July 2013
“They [London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson] would not have asked me to propose to London this fire safety plan if they did not believe that they could continue in that objective [“bringing down fire in this city”].”
Boris Johnson, Ask The Mayor, Central Hall Westminster, 12 June 2013
In answer to consultation responses that called for fire stations to be kept open and the cancellation of the Mayor’s imposed funding cuts of £45m over two years, London Fire Commissioner Ron Dobson says:
“The Brigade is bound by the budget expectations that the Mayor sets for the service.
“It is for the Mayor to consider how much of the resources available to him should be spent on London’s fire and rescue service. The Authority is not able to redirect such funding away from other services and has to operate within spending limits specified by the Mayor.” (page 35,LSP5 July 2013)
The flawed consultation
The effect of the Mayor’s repeated false reassurances to Londoners about the impact of his fire service cuts was to limit responses to the consultation on LSP5 held from 4 March to 17 June 2013.
The Mayor’s public statements, detailed above, about reducing fire deaths and improving fire engine response times were untrue, but they will have helped to reduce the level of concern expressed by Londoners during the consultation.
The misleading impression created by the Mayor’s lies was added to by LFEPA publicity and press briefings, and the very late release of information that Londoners needed in order to make a considered judgment about the impact of the cuts.
Press briefings
Throughout the consultation period, media representatives asking about slower response times as a result of the cuts were briefed as follows:
“The brigade will maintain its existing target attendance time of getting its first fire engine to an emergency within an average six minutes.”
This statement referred to the target attendance time, not the forecast for actual response times in the 38 wards where the target attendance time will no longer be met.
Publicity
LFEPA leaflets and press advertisements publicising public consultation meetings stated:
“The plan ….. includes plans to keep within our target attendance times for getting to incidents”
This leaflet (attached) was distributed by the LFEPA in boroughs where the target attendance times would no longer be met as a result of the Mayor’s proposals. For example in Camden, the LFEPA publicity did not mention the proposal to close Belsize fire station with the result that in six wards (with a combined population of 73,000) the first fire engine will no longer arrive within the target six minute response time.
It is reasonable to suggest that attendance at meetings and public involvement in the consultation would have been far higher if the LFEPA publicity had honestly stated that fire engines would get to incidents more slowly.
Late release of information
The breakdown of forecast average response times by ward was not released until 8 May, more than two months after the consultation started. It was only when this information was published that it became clear that the cuts would lead to an additional 43 wards (now 38) having forecast response times higher than the six minute target.