Last night (5th February) the Labour group on the London Assembly published details of how Boris Johnson has allowed London’s representation in the key economy of India has ceased, with London’s offices there mothballed.
 
In response to questions by Labour Member of the London Assembly, Murad Qureshi, Johnson has admitted that the London Development Agency’s offices in India, established by his predecessor Ken Livingstone to promote London’s interests in one of the world’s most important developing economies, are no longer functioning.
 
According to Boris Johnson’s answer, “the LDA’s representatives in Mumbai and Delhi resigned last year and have not yet been replaced”, pending a review that will decide whether the offices should be reopened.

This was one of the largest morning seminars at the conference, with well over 100 attendants from different backgrounds, ages and walks of life.

Charing the session, Murziline Parchment spoke of how London has long welcomed all communities and has been at the forefront of defending freedom of thought and cultural expression for people of all faiths and none. She described how this basic message of tolerance and freedom is being undermined with the growth of racism and the far-right. 

Mike Barnard, organiser of the forthcoming UpRise festival spoke of the importance of cultural events that reflect the view of 83% of londoners who prize the city's diversity as one of its best attributes.  He outlined the importance of a concerted effort to both challenge racism and celebrate diversity, which the previous GLA administration had championed, resulting in a fall in racist attacks when they were rising nationally.  He called on everyone to support the UpRise festival, which has grown out of a petition of thousands of Londoners, lobbying  Boris Johnson to reinstate it.

Professor Tariq Ramadan outlined the need for a pluralistic society which fully integrates all cultures. He criticised the moves across Europe which have singled out Muslims, through the banning of the veil, and the minaret, and which have resulted in the isolation of these communities, and therefore has led to a barrier to enabling these communities to integrate into society.  He also outlined that freedom comes out of knowledge about others, not ignorance, and that the current debate is dominated by  issues of class and racial inequality.

by Lembit Öpik MP

I’m a practical kind of person.  I don’t like the high levels of dogma which seems to attach itself to party politics and elections.  There are good people in every political party, and no major grouping is 100% wrong.  So I make judgements on people and parties as I find them.  That’s how I’m approaching the question of what really constitutes a progressive outcome in political terms for the UK.

This can only be answered by adding one’s own political views to an assessment for the level of competence and trustworthiness one believes to be present in other parties.  These are the crucial factors in determining the viability and desirability of various combinations of partnership.

My own conclusions are fairly straightforward.  As a left leaning libertarian, I feel the Conservatives have much to prove on both their economic and social credentials.  Actions speak louder than words and the last time the Tories were trying to run the country they did not grace themselves in tolerant or liberal minded social policy, Clause 28 being an infamous example.  To those who say they’ve changed, I reply “you can’t talk yourself out of a problem you’ve behaved yourself into.”  A few votes in Parliament is a far cry from an endemic reform of outlook, and I fear the authoritarian and dogmative streak is still writ large across the current Tory philosophy.

That this House recalls that the Mayor of London promised prior to his election that `it is important for the Mayor to take a public lead, so I will chair the Metropolitan Police Authority'; further recalls that he promised in his manifesto that `I will take personal responsibility,' and that `no offence will be too trivial to demand my attention' and that he claimed that `no challenge will be so big that I shrug my shoulders and pass the buck'; notes that on 27 January 2010 the Mayor broke all of these pledges to Londoners by resigning as the chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority; further notes with concern that the Mayor's draft budget contains a proposal to cut the number of police in the capital by 455 officers; further notes that the net effect of his four budgets will be that the Conservative Mayor will preside over a reduction in police numbers in the capital; is reminded that police numbers in the capital fell under the last Conservative Government; contrasts this policy with Labour's record in London; believes that the Conservative Mayor's election rhetoric on crime is not matched by adequate investment in the police service; further believes there are now serious questions over what the Mayor is delivering for the capital; and urges the Mayor to reverse his policy of squeezing the budget for the fight against crime at the expense of Londoners.

Click here to see if your local MP has signed it.