Morning:
13°c
Ken Livingstone approved secret plans for big post-election Tube and bus fare increases - and misled Londoners about them, according to his own transport commissioner.
In confidential emails leaked to the Evening Standard, Peter Hendy, the head of Transport for London, accused the Mayor of telling "stories" when on 14 November last year he promised the London Assembly fares would rise only in line with inflation for the next four years.
Mr Livingstone also told a press conference on 30 October that he saw "no need" for future fare increases above inflation, and pledged that unless a new government was elected he "guaranteed" to hold down fares to inflation in 2009 and 2010.
TfL's actual plan - approved by Mr Livingstone himself just six days before - was to increase bus fares by two per cent above inflation, and Tube fares by one per cent above inflation, in both 2009 and 2010.
There would also be a further one per cent aboveinflation increase to pay for Crossrail, apparently indefinitely. A copy of the plan obtained by the Standard states that "real terms increases in income from fares" will be needed "to ensure that the investment programme can be financed".
Over the next 20 months, such increases would add about 25p to the standard cash single fare on a bus and about £6 a week to an all-zone Travelcard, even though TfL fares are already among the highest of any world capital. Despite the projections in the plan, Mr Livingstone has continued to claim that fares will not rise in real terms. Only yesterday, launching his bus manifesto, he promised "fares will continue to be held down."
However, TfL's financial position, with enormous capital projects such as Crossrail, makes above inflation fare increases for commuters inevitable.
Mr Livingstone's public statements about fares not needing to rise triggered deep alarm at the highest levels of TfL. In an email to Mr Hendy on 19 November, Steve Allen, TfL's director of finance, says: "I am concerned that the Mayor's statements on fares are not compatible with the assumptions we have made in our plans, and we will only get ourselves (and him) into trouble if we try to gloss over that."
Mr Allen quotes Mr Livingstone's 14 November statement to the Assembly that "there shouldn't be any reason why fares should need to rise more than in line with inflation over the next four years".
Mr Allen then refers to the retail price index, which is used as a way of measuring inflation. He tells Mr Hendy: "As you know, the [TfL] Business Plan assumption is RPI plus 1 for the Tube, RPI plus 2 for buses in Jan 09 and 10 ... then RPI plus 1 per cent for all fares thereafter. All of that has been discussed with Ken.
"The Plan assumptions, approved by the [TfL] Board and the Mayor, are materially different from the Mayor's most recent statements and he will be asked awkward questions once that becomes clear."
In earlier emails between the two men, Mr Hendy admits: "On fares, Ken has been adding stories." He says he has "no idea" how the Mayor's fares claim "gels with RPI+1 for Crossrail."
Mr Allen replies to these earlier emails, referring to fares planned for 2009 and 2010: "Quite. We've been very clear that our assumption in the Business Plan is RPI+1/RPI+2 for Jan 09 and Jan 10 and we've assumed [a further] 1 per cent to those numbers and assumed RPI+1% long term in the context of the Spending Review, Metronet and Crossrail. I am sure Ken understood this.
"I am thus somewhat bemused by his statements and concerned that he may have boxed himself into a tighter fares policy than we thought we had agreed. If fares are to be pegged to RPI, we will have a big hole in the Business Plan."
The business plan, published every year, is the key document setting out TfL's projected spending, fare income and fare levels. The plan to which the two men were referring was approved by the TfL board on 24 October.
Click here to see the leaked emails and business plan (PDF)
A copy of it has been obtained by the Standard. On page 67, under the heading "Maximising income," it says: "The Business Plan is predicated on real terms increases in the level of income from fares and charges over the period 2005/6 to 2009/10 to ensure that the Investment Programme can be financed."
Mr Livingstone chaired the 24 October board meeting and, as the emails make clear, explicitly approved the above-inflation fare increases in the plan. Yet the following week, at the 30 October press conference, he was claiming that there would be no such increases.
He repeated the claim at Mayor's Questions in the Assembly on 14 November. Mayoral officials also strongly denied to reporters that there would need to be any increase in fares for Crossrail.
The emails show how, instead of setting the record straight, Mr Hendy and the Mayor's top advisers decided to "sit on" the plan and not make it public for the time being. In the meantime, the emails show, they struggled to come up with a "line to take" that glossed over differences between what the Mayor had agreed in private and what he had said in public.
On 15 November Vernon Everitt, TfL's head of communications, wrote to Redmond O'Neill, the Mayor's senior transport adviser: "I have resisted intense pressure here [at TfL] to publish the Plan on our website until we are completely aligned on the line to take. But I think we must reach a landing on this today if humanly possible."
Mr Everitt advised honesty. His recommended "line to take" was: "TfL must maintain a balanced budget, and its Business Plan gives the conservative estimate [for fares] of inflation plus 2 per cent rises for the bus network, and inflation plus 1 per cent on the Tube."
His line continued that fare income had been above expectations in recent years, and "if this trend continues ... we will look to keep fares from rising at above the rate of inflation." Mr O'Neill rejected the advice, instead telling TfL to stay with the line - if anyone asked - that "the Mayor plans to keep fares increases down to RPI". The only concession in the form of words approved was that fares might have to rise if revenues fell below projections. Following these instructions, TfL officials then secretly rewrote the version of the business plan destined for publication.
This version, available on the TfL website, deletes all reference to above-inflation fare rises and claims there will be no such increases.
Under TfL standing orders, its board must approve any change to the business plan. However, there is no record in the board's published minutes that they did so. TfL claimed last night that the rewrite was approved by the board at a secret meeting on 18 December.
The Mayor's office last night gave a different date for the secret meeting, 18 January.
Two members of the board contacted by the Standard said they had no recollection of approving a change to fares policy.
TfL insisted last night that the new business plan was published in January, after the board had approved it at the secret meeting. However, the date on the front cover of the business plan is December.
Mr Hendy's foreword, in which he claims "the Board have reviewed this Business Plan, having regard to its deliverability and robustness and ensuring that all business pressures have been managed in a prudent and responsible manner", is dated November, the month before the board supposedly approved the rewritten plan.
Under the Greater London Authority Act, TfL must draw up a balanced budget, in which its income covers its spending. But scrapping the above-inflation element of the fare rises would leave TfL with what Mr Allen described as a "big hole" in its income.
The hole would be at least £41 million a year, according to the documentation, or £164 million over the plan's fouryears - a sum equivalent to the entire annual cost of the Freedom Pass.
TfL could reduce its spending to make up for the shortfall in fares income. But crucially, in the published version of the business plan, TfL's projection of spending, £3.946 billion, is actually slightly higher than that in the secret version of the plan, £3.941 billion.
Other ways TfL could plug the gap are by borrowing more; drawing on its reserve; raising the council tax precept; or getting a bigger grant from central government.
But a comparison between the published and secret versions of the plan shows it is not doing any of these things, apart from an extra £5 million from the reserve.
TfL claimed last night that it had identified "cost savings", including spending less on marketing and consultancy staff.
It insisted it had now decided fares would not have to rise above inflation at any point over the next four years, as Mr Livingstone promised. But it was unable to say how it would pay for Crossrail if this is the case.
TfL has to find £7.6 billion of Cross-rail's £16 billion cost; £3.5 billion of its share will be borrowed, with the loan repaid from fare revenues and the interest on the loan funded by a new supplementary business rate.
A TfL spokesman said: "The Mayor, not TfL, sets the level of fares. We must, by law, set a balanced annual budget, taking into account the Mayor's fares policy. That is exactly what we have done and will continue to do."
A spokesman for Mr Livingstone said: "The Mayor's policy is that fares should not rise above the rate of inflation over the next four years, and TfL's board adopted a business plan on 18 January taking this into account.
"This involved some efficiency savings but no cuts in services or investment, reflecting the the fact that fares revenue continues to rise alongside rising passenger numbers."
Mr Livingstone's Conservative opponent, Boris Johnson, said: "This is devastating. It shows Ken will say anything to get elected, and will mislead Londoners about his real plans.
"He has effectively been accused of deceiving the public by his own transport commissioner. It brings together two great doubts Londoners have about Ken: his cost and his untrustworthiness."
Tony Travers, government expert at the London School of Economics, said: "These emails sound pretty difficult for Ken. Anyone standing for office needs to be open about the reality that fares have to go up.
"The levels of spending commitments facing TfL are growing very rapidly - not just Crossrail, but the East London line and the Olympics."
Click here to see the leaked emails and business plan (PDF)
Reader views (35)
Its just makes my skin creep, Londoners slimed again as Ken tries to get away with it. Kens a slimer and I expect more slimy items to come out trying to deceive the poor, the old and the young before they find out they have been dupped again as the facts come out too late after an election. Lets get rid of a whole lot of them when we have a small chance now. Vote for a change
- Gavin, Croydon
We have too much overpaid transport in London. We should not let these contractors get away with it. Hopefully Boris will sort out this Livingstone legacy of bureaucracy and pet projects. If only London transport would work than it would be OK but it has gotten so bad.
- Georgie, Islington, London
Shocking! The lies and Cover-ups that are taking place in Ken’s administration all in order to win the voters over - and then the truth somehow sneaks out! So if Ken lied about the TFL fares hikes then it must be said he is no doubly lying about the congestion charge rate rise? I am sure that there are Heaps more things he is lying/ covering up but we shall never hear of them until a change happens? Wasn’t the New City Hall designed to be transparent – to encourage clarity etc?
- Phil, London
Hang on. So, let's just unpick this. Transport officials said we need X amount and fares will need to rise above inflation. Ken and his officials said, no, find some other savings. Transport officials said, OK we've found other savings and fares will not need to rise above inflation. Isn't this a normal process of submitting a bid, then revising it? What's the problem?
- Richard, Forest Hill
I propose a law, which would make it illegal for a public servant to knowingly tell a lie. If found guilty, he/she would be barred from office for a given period. I would like to see people like Livingstone and Brown banned from British politics. Through their lies and actions they have cost rich and poor a bloody fortune and our lives are no better for it.
- Bill, London
Yet again fantastic investigative journalism from Mr Gilligan - he is a hero to Londoners for exposing the corrupt machinations being perpetrated at TfL (Torture for London) and City Hall.
The most interesting point in the e-mails I thought was where it says : 4.1 TfL's business plan is financed from six main sources
- Income from Congestion Charge
For me this stinks to high heaven and almost proves what everybody thinks - The CON Charge is a total sham and is purely a tax raising scam which has nothing to do with congestion or pollution.
Corrupt King Ken the crook needs to be arrested and deported to somewhere a long way away!
- Daniel Howard, London,UK
We need an independent review of the crossrail project - what it will cost passengers and ratepayers, and whether it is really worth it to spend so much for such a pathetic scheme.
- Mr Michael H Schabas, London
If true, shouldn't the board of TFL be prosecuted? They are meant to be acting impartially and are essentially civil servants. How on earth can they justify manipulation like this to support the candidate they favour?
- George, SE London
I notice both of Ken supporters are out again. Isn't it funny that they weren't defending him when Lee Jasper resigned and were suspiciously quiet when he was accused of filtering his funds through the Labour party to disguise his donation from unions and property developers. In fact, they seem to keep quiet most of the time unless an article is written by Andrew Gilligan when they accuse Mr Gilligan of Boris bias which appears to be their only defence of Ken, no denials of his cronyism are ever put forward, one would almost think they were on his payroll.
- Boris Bias, Kennington
This man never changes he has always been a nasty piece of work and lying is second nature to him. He holds everyone in not so secret contempt and thinks the rest of us are there for the taking. Livingstone has directly added huge cost to everyone living in London through sky high fares and the congestion charge.
Anyone who requires a tradesman in London gets to pay the congestion charge because it goes straight onto the bill they receive.
When Livingstone got control of the GLC all those years ago it was through backstabbing and lies and nothing has changed.
London now has a cheap and nasty image built on lies thanks to Livingstone and new labour who are traitors to the the working class who they despise.
- K Harrop, hertford uk
Surely some of your readers will remember him from his GLC days. He gave money away then like a man demented and he is still cheating his was around us. Mrs. T. got rid of the GLC through him and now he is commencing again. Good luck to whoever wins next week but if you are at home God please don't let it be Ken.
- Joan Battershill, Mitcham Surrey
The one thing that voters will not forgive is deception by politicians. It is time for Mr Livingstone to be honest about the fares, honest about crime, honest about what his cronies have been up to. Dadly he only has a few days left - I am not holding my breath.
- Colin, London UK
This is yet another example showing that Livingstone cannot be trusted, I wonder how many other will come to light. A person as untrustworthy as Livingstone should not be elected as Mayor of London. The article mentions that a possible way of raising the additional money required would be to increase the Mayoral precept on the Council tax. This precept has already risen by almost 300% since Livingstone was elected in 2000.
- Richard Walker, Pinner, London
Ken has done some great things for London, even though his record isn't perfect as everybody knows. I used to buy the Standard, not any more. It doesn't speak for real Londoners, it just speaks for the posh suburbs and the wealthy. Shame on Andrew Gilligan, and by the way - how much extra is he being paid by Tory HQ to write all of his nasty smart Alex articles?
- Matt, London
When is everybody going to wake up? In any socialist or communist world, the working class people are the bottom of the pile, while the middle class dictators like Ken Livingston and his mates lives in a Mickey Mouse world!
Don't think it will ever be forgotten or forgiven.
- Joe Sardena, Swanley Kent
The Mayor seems to have utter contempt for taxpayers. Does everyone remember the "public consultation" he paraded concerning extension of the congestion zone which he then more or less disregarded? Does everyone remember when he hiked up of the £5 congestion charge by 60% - how suddenly he admitted that it was never just about tackling congestion but was "always" intended also as a means of raising revenue. That's funny because I seem to recall that the original debate about implementing a congestion charge was all about traffic flow. Then we have started getting all manner of "green" initiatives, so we can be charged not just for road use but for clean air, too. And now we find out that the Olympic Bid was not about sport, it was a cover for pouring £9bn of cement into the new East of East End to create a fantasy London. Is anyone really going to want to live in or around a large clam shell? Convenient if you need a 50m swim lane, but what other local amenities will have been left out of the equation? Regeneration is a wonderful thing, but I have no confidence that this sort of rushed, deceptively planned operation will deliver anything other than a new Elephant & Castle.
- Blackstone, London
Ken's manipulation of TfL is a real scandal - we have been misled by consultation on the congestion charge - particularly the Western extension. We have been misled on the Low Emission Zone figures. We have been told that the £25 for gas guzzlers will improve air quality and then we find that actually that is not the case, and the benefit would be marginal or nothing at all. Ken we have had enough of you misleading us, it is time for a change and a new administration. Londoners do not trust you any more
- Victoria Borwick, London, UK
So Livingstone is a liar? You call this news??
- Lawrence, London
After many weeks on the campaign trail the one thing we can trust Ken Livingstone on is his lies!
Ken has had his day, he should step down now before more of his lies are exposed.
I have no doubt with respect to Paddick's integrity but as a businessman with two offices in London, one within the Congestion Zone I'll be backing Boris.
He has continually come up with policies that the majority of Londoners agree with.
If anyone doubts Boris's seriousness in wanting to be the Mayor for London they should doubt no more. He has visited every London Borough at least twice (and in Enfield's case five times!) since March in his efforts to fully understand the problems ALL Londoners are facing and not just those in Zone 1.
I can't wait for May 2nd when Boris is our new Mayor!
- Ertan Hurer, London, England
I am not surprised!
- Susan, London
This is just further proof of the contempt Red Ken holds the public in. He believes that he always knows best and like a true Marxist he is going to deliver it whether you like it or not.
- Mark, London
We all know how excessively expensive and how failing London transport has been recently. Red Ken has been misleading all his political life as far as I know and is not a leader.
- Jacqueline, Hampstead, London
Well I do care about Liars and all my senior family members (8) have voted by post for Boris. Hope there is an investigation by the Police when he is voted out and criminal proceedings are taken.
- Den, London
How much more sleaze and unanswered questions must we put up with? I have made my mind up to Back Boris because I truly believe that he will run a transparent and decent GLA. This is our chance as Londoners to start a whole new era. Go for it for boy!
- Melanie Hampton, London
I don't care what they say about Ken I have still voted for him (postal voting has been done already). He has done a great job on the public transport system and you cannot tell me that any of the other jokers in the running will actually charge less for tickets and get rid of the congestion charge - it makes too much money for them to axe it!
- Charlie, London
It is indeed true Barry. Indeed after he lost his job, The Spectator, edited by one Boris Johnson, employed Gilligan. Still, as has been clear from Gilligan's daily diatribes he has taken a professional journalistic neutrality, of which journalists on the Zimbabwe Herald would be proud, in reporting these elections. He neither favours Ken nor the person who got him back into paid employment and for whom he formerly worked!
- Brian Capaloff, Falkirk, Scotland (Formerly London)
Typical of Livingstone. This guy is like a bad onion, layer after layer is rotten lies and deception. Will we ever uncover just how rotten is the Livingtone Onion? Is there a good core? I very much doubt it.
- David, Crawley UK
Another confusing article. Is it saying that rises are to be above inflation - contrary to what Ken said? Or is it saying that they are not to be above inflation, i.e. no real terms rise? There are various projects for which funding has to be found, but before quoting from self-styled 'lefty' Gilligan's favoured right wing candidate the article reconfirms Ken's determination that rises should not be above inflation.
- Brian Capaloff, Falkirk, Scotland (Formerly London)
What's this - Ken Livingstone misleading Londoners? Must be a day with a 'y' in it.
- Jane, London
Why are you using the word "misled"? If your article is all true, then Livingstone lied to us, plain and simple, and if he's willing to lie about this, one has to wonder how many other things he is lying about. London deserves better than having a mayor who thinks it's okay to lie to us. Let's send a message by voting for anyone-but-Livingstone.
- St, London
If you want a Mayor who'll demonstrate probity and truthfulness, Brian Paddick's your man. His honesty over the Stockwell shooting was outstanding. He could have kept stum, and not spoken out against inaccurate statements put out by his boss Sir Ian Blair over the shooting of the innocent Brazilian, and then got a promotion. But he did the right thing, not the right thing for his career.
And, with the fairer voting system, Brian can win! A lot of people I speak to say either that they've enough of Ken, or don't want to let Boris in. So they're voting Brian with their first choice, then tactically with their second. It's not just Lib Dems voting Brian, Peter, and Lib Dems don't think with one mind, in any event.
- Lee Baker, London
If this is "true" then Ken Livingstone must be both "sacked immediately" and prevented from entering any job either "directly" or "indirectly" related to politics ever again!
- Fraser, Telford Park
Is it just me, or does anyone else think he looks like yoda in this picture?
- Neil Grinsell, london
More great smearing from the Evening Boris.
Is it true Andrew Gilligan used to work for Boris Johnson at The Spectator?
Small world.
- Barry L Smith, London SE4
One week to go & still the revelations continue to surface. I would not trust Mr Livingstone to organize a kids tea party, let alone elect him for another four years. I hope the Lib Dem voters see sense & don't put his name down as their second preference vote. This man's wrongdoings are now being exposed, please send him off to retirement to play with his many kids & the newts next week.
- Peter King, london, england
