Greenwich.co.uk

Greenwich news and information

Council leader “can’t seem to work with other people” – Spencer Drury Interview Pt2

By

This is part two of Adam Bienkov’s interview with Spencer Drury – Conservative candidate for the Greenwich & Woolwich parliamentary seat and leader of the Conservatives on Greenwich Council. Click here to read part one of the interview.

I meet Spencer Drury the day after the monthly full meeting of Greenwich Council. As usual the Conservative group raised a motion which was voted down by Labour, with Council leader Chris Roberts dismissing the debate as a “complete irrelevance.” Only a handful of voters were there to hear it.

And yet every week a newspaper promoting the Council’s agenda and featuring exclusively Labour politicians is distributed to the entire borough. Many thousands of voters will go on to read it.

So how can an opposition party ever hope to counter this imbalance?

“There is a real problem in Greenwich. Labour have been in power for 40 years and as an opposition the changing system has made it hard to make any contribution at all. We’re marginalised on scrutiny panels which are 100% chaired by Labour members and we can bring motions to Council which obviously get voted down. So the council side of it is very hard to contribute to at all. And it is hard to break through what is essentially a taxpayer funded infrastructure in place to support the Labour Party.”

So would the Conservatives close down Greenwich Time?

“Yes. Well I think that you would need some kind of communication, so I would look at the Bexley model where you have a quarterly magazine and it is a case of just what’s on in the borough. But this council spends a fortune on advertising itself and Greenwich Time has to go. It is wrong. It is morally wrong to be pumping out propaganda at the expense of the taxpayer”

But is it really just a political vehicle?

“I mean it went weekly the week after Boris was elected. Tell me that wasn’t a political decision. It was fortnightly before then and it went weekly genuinely the week afer he was elected.”

He tells me about the council’s campaign to bring the Oyster card to the Thames Clippers. For Drury this was little more than a show, with the aims of the campaign won long before the council even became involved:

“I asked for the background papers and the Council didn’t actually do anything. They just ran their campaign in Greenwich. They didn’t tell the Mayor they were running this campaign. The Mayor had already made the decision anyway and they delivered their petition to him I believe a week before the decision was announced publically.  So all the decisions had been made and their influence was absolutely zero.”

So why bother to do it?

“They just wanted to stand around and pose with printed blue cards run in their own council paper saying how fabulous they are.  And it’s just rotten. It’s just wasting time and money when they should be doing things that improve the lives of people in this borough.”

So what can the opposition do in these circumstances. Where can they be effective?

“Well what you can do is be a good ward member and make sure that your residents are represented. And I enjoy that and it is worth doing.”

But do the Council listen to those representations?

“To be honest we’re pretty much excluded. Chris Robert’s political approach is to make sure that the Labour party does what he wants them to and he’s got no interest in paying attention to any other views even those within the Labour party, let alone the opposition. And he will let us contribute occasionally on minor things so I’m hoping that he will be letting us contribute on the coat of arms for the Royal Borough for instance. But this is not something that is going to make much difference to many residents.”

What do you make of him personally?

“Well I think he is very divisive. With Chris you are either with him or against him. And that applies to opposition politicians but that also applies to people within the Labour party. You see very often the Labour group split over the hard line that he has taken over certain issues. And his relations with the Mayor of London are dreadful now and they were dreadful when there was a Labour Mayor of London.  He just can’t seem to work with other people.”

I ask him about reports that Roberts is moving wards at the election. Is he running away from defeat?

“Well he had one of the lowest votes I believe of anyone on the council and he was comfortably lower than the other two Labour councillors in the peninsula. So there is certainly a negative attittude towards Chris and he is certainly the only person who I have spoken to people about on the doorstep and they have said “well I’m not a Conservative voter but I’m definitely not voting for Roberts”. So he definitely isn’t a popular figure”


In part three of the inteview, to be published tomorrow, Spencer Drury is asked about the 2012 Olympics, schooling in Greenwich and the forthcoming General Election campaign.

Blackwall Tunnel U-turn a “huge disappointment” – Spencer Drury Interview Pt1

By

The Conservative’s parliamentary candidate for Greenwich and Woolwich has spoken of his “huge disappointment” after the Mayor broke his promise to reinstate tidal flow in the Blackwall Tunnel.

Speaking during a wide-ranging interview with Greenwich.co.uk, the current leader of the Conservatives on the council Spencer Drury said:

“I think it is a huge disappointment because it does create congestion unnecessarily. For years it worked perfectly well and I can’t see why it suddenly had to change.”

In the run up to the Mayoral elections, Boris Johnson promised to reverse the controversial decision to end tidal flow “at the earliest opportunity.”

The pledge gathered widespread support in the area and formed a major part of his transport manifesto. However, last month he admitted to LBC presenter Nick Ferrari that he would not fulfill his promise:

“If I were to impose my will and say restore that contraflow and if there was then to be some huge conflagration in that tunnel and there were fatalities I’m afraid then under the present law of corporate manslaughter brought in by this Labour government then the tragedy is that I would be liable.”

Asked about the legal implications comments, Spencer Drury replied:

“I’m not aware of the legal position so I will have to take [Boris’s] word for that, but yes it is a disappointment.”

The importance of relieving congestion at Blackwall was highlighted after a recent fire in the tunnel caused widespread traffic chaos in the area. It also comes after reports that Olympic lanes will be installed in the tunnels.

However, on this issue Spencer Drury insists that the Mayor has listened:

“We’ve spoken with the Mayor’s office and they have said that this is not the case, so I don’t believe that the plan that we have seen in the public domain is the plan that we are going to end up with. I think the Mayor is listening to us on this.”

He also hit out at Greenwich Council for failing to deal with congestion in the area:

“I have always said that one of the things that you could have as a legacy from the Olympics is sorting out congestion in Greenwich, that we could get outside organisations involved and say that we want this as a legacy and I think that many more residents would be on board about the Olympics if it meant we could sort out the town centre.”

However, he suggested that the council’s plans to pedestrianise the town centre were little more than an election gimmick:

“If you were cynical about it you might suggest that it is just because there is an election coming up because there doesn’t appear to have been a proper plan behind this. The problem is that they haven’t done a study on the surrounding areas. This is a huge hub within SE London and the impact the plans would have on Lewisham and on Deptford and on the A2 is even bigger. And because the Council have not looked at it on a global scale we might have a situation where it would work for one part of Greenwich but then has a negative effect elsewhere.”

He believes that the council should instead secure funding to widen certain roads in the borough and even to build a road tunnel under Blackheath:

“Well one of my colleagues was very keen on taking one the road across the heath down into a tunnel because you could dig down very easily there and make it wider. I think that would be a lovely idea although I don’t know whether we would ever be able to afford it. But quite clearly if we want to look after our town centre we have to look at something that would be a genuine leagacy from the Olympics”

In part two of our interview Spencer Drury speaks out against plans to build a temporary stadium in Greenwich Park, says that the continued publication of Greenwich Time is “morally wrong” and claims that Chris Roberts is a “divisive” and unpopular leader of the council.

“It would be a mistake for Ken Livingstone to stand again” – Nick Raynsford interview pt3

By

In part three of our interview with local MP, Nick Raynsford, he gives his thoughts on a variety of issues…

ON PLANS FOR AN EAST THAMES CROSSING

“I have absolutely no doubt that the Thames Gateway Bridge was necessary and will be built in due course and the mayor in the meantime is using this review as a fig leaf to cover his embarrassment. The reason he rejected the bridge was not a proper appraisal of Transport needs. It was because Ian Clement who was then his Deputy Mayor, now disgraced, was the leader of Bexley Council which politically was totally opposed to the TGB. It was a purely political decision. Boris knows that and he is trying to find a way out from an embarrassing position.

“The idea that you will somehow solve this problem by having some kind of additional ferry where the Bridge was supposed to be is for the birds.”

ON THE SILVERTOWN LINK AND TOLLING BLACKWALL

“In the long term there probably is a need for the Silvertown Link as well but I think the overwhelming priority is to get the Thames Gateway Bridge in first. Actually if you have TGB you would almost certainly have to toll Blackwall as well because you would have the risk of people not using the TGB even though it may be the logical one to use because of the toll.”

ON AIRPORT EXPANSION

“City Airport at the moment is meeting a need but it is a difficult one which has been highlighted by the introduction of these transatlantic flights. They are much, much noisier and you are in a very, very densely populated area and people living there are nervous about further expansion. It’s a small niche airport providing a need for people particularly in Canary Wharf and the City who want to get quick access to an airport and travel faster than they can via Heathrow, but it is not he right location for a major airport certainly not flying transatlantic flights.”

Greeenwich.co.uk: Did you oppose the recent expansion of the airport?

“I didn’t oppose it because at the moment I think that City Airport should continue to expand but if you had an estuary airport, which I back, then clearly that would replace City and the business demand for it at Canary Wharf would gravitate very, very easily to the Estuary Airport.”

Greenwich.co.uk: Doesn’t the same arguments you have made for not expanding Heathrow, also apply to City Airport?

“You’re talking about completely different things. You’re not talking about a major international hub airport. You’re talking about a relatively small niche operation, which closes for half the weekend. No flights at all Saturday to Sunday lunch time because that’s the conditions in which it operates. So it is a small operation which while the planes are small, doesn’t create a great deal of conflict. I get more complaints from
constituents about flights into Heathrow than I do about City Airport.”

ON THE NEXT MAYORAL ELECTIONS AND KEN LIVINGSTONE

“I’ve said no more than that I think it would be a mistake for Ken Livingstone to stand again. I think in many ways he was a very good mayor. He made mistakes but he also did some very brave things which got the mayoralty off onto basically a very sound footing. So I pay a lot of tribute to Ken but I don’t think that he would be the right candidate next time. I think that the Labour party should be looking for a new younger candidate who would be able to take London through really towards well into the second quarter of the century.”

ON BORIS JOHNSON

“I think he has been successful with communicating with the public who like his cheerful slightly eccentric style, but I think he’s made some serious mistakes on policy of which the TGB is an example. He’s clearly made a hash of the tall buildings policy, where he initially said that there won’t going to be any and has stood on his head on that, and he’s also I’m afraid made some very poor choices in terms of people to serve him and that surprises me because his criticisms of Ken for employing Lee Jasper were in my view well justified and you would have thought he would have been rather more careful about who he appointed and how they operated in his office. So it’s a mixed picture.”

Missed the previous parts of this interview?

PART 2: Nick Raynsford on the “bogus claims” of Olympic protestors and the “cult of personality” at Greenwich Time.

PART 1: The Greenwich Market Hotel “will be built” says Nick Raynsford

The “bogus claims” of Olympic protestors and the “cult of personality” at Greenwich Time – Nick Raynsford Interview pt 2

By

As I walk into Nick Raynsford’s Westminster office, he begins  to tell me about a meeting that he has just had at Greenwich Park.

He talks at length about the benefits he believes the equestrian events will bring from a “new feature” in the children’s playground to a “restructuring” of the Blackheath gate. He also talks about the wider economic development that he believes the games will bring to the town.

But while he is obviously enthusiastic about holding the Equestrian events here in Greenwich, it is striking how dismissive he is of those who oppose them:

“The problem with the NOGOE campaign is that they have not been prepared to listen to any evidence at all. They have their own preset view that this is going to be a disaster. They don’t want it, they don’t like it and they won’t listen to any evidence. That I’m afraid discredits them in the eyes of most rational people and observers”

Raynsford believes that opponents of the events have deliberately been spreading false information about it:

“I have to say that those people who have been campaigning against it have used in my view some extremely bogus claims and made some very dishonest statements that have actually caused alarm and concern to people who genuinely love the park

“And these claims are completely groundless. The claims that trees were going to be cut down in large numbers, that the ground would be destroyed and all churned up and giving the impression that this is some sort of Grand National type event when it is literally seventy horses, on one day, doing one circuit, and that’s it.”

Raynsford also believes that Olympic organisers failed to communicate their plans to the public until recently. He says that LOCOG “let their eye off the ball” in the early stages and “were not as responsive as they should have been” to objectors.

But despite this, he still believes that there is strong enthusiasm for the Olympics in the town:

“The overwhelming majority of young people in the area are wholly supportive, and the interesting thing about this is that there is quite a split between those who have been most vocal against the Olympics who tend to be older, and those under 55, who are in my experience overwhelmingly supportive.”

Yet while he believes that the “overwhelming majority” of young people are “wholly supportive” he is dismissive of a recent survey carried out by Conservative Assembly member Gareth Bacon showing significant opposition to the equestrian events:

“That was completely unscientific and politically motivated and frankly I do not regard it as serious and it is trying to use this for political purposes and I think that is very unprincipled. I think the right approach here has to be to engage seriously with LOCOG and the Royal Parks Agency, which are the two agencies best able to judge how this can be managed and then to listen to their views.”

Throughout our conversation I am struck by the relative weight he places on the views of officers, experts and agencies against those of politicians and campaigners.

I wonder whether this is a result of his extensive work outside parliament in the private sector.  Does this work interfere with his main role as a constituency MP?

“I think that parliament would be a very much weaker place if MPs didn’t have outside interests. My interests are all in the area I have worked throughout my professional life, so it’s housing, it’s construction, regeneration, that sort of area where I have quite a lot of expertise. I ran a consultancy before I was elected so this is not doing something new and it’s certainly not cashing in on ministerial experience which is one of the other allegations that is made. It’s simply pursuing expertise that I have had as a result of my professional career which I think makes me a better MP to comment on what is happening here at Westminster. So in debates on regeneration housing and construction I can usually give a pretty informed view and without sounding too immodest it does usually command a certain amount of respect rather than just partisan responses.”

I ask him how many days a week he spends in Greenwich. He says that he spends “at least one” to which he adds

“I tend to work around a 70-80 hour week and I’m quite confident if anyone looked at the hours I spend they would see that I spend at least 55 hours a week on parliamentary or constituency business, so the outside work is not interfering with that.”

There is little doubt that Raynsford is closely involved in local politics and on the morning of our interview I spot him on page three of the council’s newspaper Greenwich Time.

In the picture, he is standing alongside Labour Councillor Peter Brooks, celebrating the acceptance of Oyster Cards on Thames Clippers.

I ask him how he can justify appearing in a publication that many people believe is just “electioneering on the rates”

“I think it is important that the council does have a mechanism to communicate but I think it does have to be very careful how it uses that. I took with a pinch of salt some of the criticisms that were voiced about this being party propaganda because it came to a head when the Evening Standard was running an absolutely vitriolic campaign against Ken Livingstone and I think that what is sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander”

Yet in my copy of Greenwich Time I also find reams of advertising for local businesses, a feature on Leona Lewis and even a TV guide. Isn’t this deliberately designed to weaken independent newspapers in the area?

“I think there is a general problem for local newspapers across the country irrespective of whether there are aggressive local council newspapers as well, so I don’t think it is entirely fair to say that the problems facing the News Shopper and the Mercury are simply the fault of Greenwich Time. I think it is a wider problem. I do think we have to have diversity and I’m a strong believer in keeping viable local newspapers and I would certainly not want to see Greenwich Time replacing them as the only voice locally.”

But what about all the non-council related content in Greenwich Time? How can the council justify that?

“I don’t know enough about, I haven’t spoken to Peter Cordwell the editor about his reasons for doing that. My prime concern is that this should be a means of communication between the council and local people.”

But if it is just about communicating with constituents, why have  there been so many front page pictures of Council leader Chris Roberts in recent months?

“I am not myself a great believer in the cult of personality and you will not see many photos of me in Greenwich Time” he replies rather uneasily. “I don’t seek publicity in that form.”

Read part three of the interview tomorrow and find out why Nick Raynsford thinks Ken Livingstone should not stand for London Mayor in 2012.

Missed part one of the interview? Read it here

Greenwich Market Hotel “will be built” – Nick Raynsford Interview Pt1

By

Nick Raynsford MP has said that councillors were “absolutely wrong” to reject the redevelopment of Greenwich Market and says that he has “no doubt” that the hotel will be built. The comments came in an extensive interview for Greenwich.co.uk which we are publishing in three parts all this week.

The highly controversial market proposals were unanimously rejected by councillors earlier this year, but Raynsford believes that they will now go through on appeal:

“Having read rather carefully the officer report and I speak as a former minister for planning so I did have to take decisions on issues like this, I think the Hospital have got good grounds for an appeal”

“In that situation when a scheme has been strongly supported by the officers and it is rejected by the politicians then very often inspectors tend to agree with the professionals and grant the appeal.

“I think this thing will be built. I have no doubt.”

Asked whether he had spoken to Council leader Chris Roberts since he rejected the proposals, he replied:

“Yes I have and I told him I think he was wrong. He was absolutely wrong on this issue. I don’t always agree with him.”

Raynsford believes that “vested interests” misled the public about the scheme:

“The proposals didn’t get explained as they should have been to the public who were apprehensive, but you also had some people who had a vested interest in trying to present this as a Bluewater type scheme rather than what it was.”

Greenwich.co.uk: What do you mean by “vested interests”?

“Well Andrew Gilligan had turned his mind against the thing right from the outset. He was totally hostile to it, and he literally would not listen. His view was this was a totally awful scheme, and the article he wrote for the Evening Standard showed an illustration or Turnpin lane, and the argument was, this is all going to get knocked down. Nonsense. The only thing that was going to be knocked down were those steel girders that hold up the roof at the moment which actually protrude into Turnpin lane and make it a less easy area to negotiate. And the only change would have been rather more elegant supports holding the roof up. And that to my mind is not the product of somebody who has looked at it seriously.”

Raynsford still believes that the hotel will bring much needed economic benefits to the town:

“Greenwich has a huge international reputation but it doesn’t get the full benefit of that. It is known to be a beautiful place, but on the whole the tourism revenue we get is the revenue of a day trip destination. People come to London, and they say that one of the things they must do is go to Greenwich. They’ll probably take a boat down the river, they’ll spend five or six hours in Greenwich, go to the Maritime Museum, perhaps go into the park, to the Painted Hall and the chapel and perhaps the Observatory and then they’ll go back. So they come back to central London and they’ve probably spent  £10-15 in Greenwich and they’ve spent hundreds of  pounds [in the centre]”

Asked whether Greenwich Hospital will appeal the council’s decision he replied:

“Of course it is up to them, but I think they are considering whether they are going to make a fresh application or whether to appeal. Frankly I think that if they appeal they have a very good chance of success, because the officer report which is the serious professional appraisal, gave it very strong support… So a good scheme and I think that there is every chance that it will be built in due course.”

In part two of this interview, to be published tomorrow, read what Nick Raynsford has to say about the “bogus claims” of Olympic protestors and the “cult of personality” at Greenwich Time.

Woolwich Ferry may be tolled as new river crossings proposed

By

Toll booths could be introduced at the Woolwich Ferry and for the first time, as part of plans to pay for a series of new river crossings, it was revealed today.

Current legislation prevents any tolls at Woolwich. However, this could change under proposals to upgrade the existing ferries and boarding facilities.

Plans announced today for a series of new bridges, tunnels, and ferries across the river could also mean that existing crossings will be tolled.

Among the new river crossings proposed by Transport for London today are:

1. A Foot/Cycle Bridge between North Greenwich and Canary Wharf

This would be an expensive and tricky project. It’s position on the Thames means that any bridge would need to be at least 50m high in order to allow ships to pass. Despite this, TfL say that it would be an “iconic” scheme and would be “strongly supported” by both Greenwich and Tower Hamlets. The Canary Wharf group and AEG (O2) have also agreed to the bridge in principle.

2. North Greenwich to Canary Wharf passenger ferry

Cheaper than the bridge, this would require new piers on the Western side of North Greenwich and the Eastern side of Canary Wharf. Journey times would be quicker than the existing services from the Eastern side of the Peninsula. Cyclists would be able to use the crossing and like all other river services it would be fully ‘oysterised’ under current plans by the Mayor.

3. Silvertown Crossing

Talked about for many years, Boris Johnson has already signaled that he’s keen on this project. Running from Silvertown to the Greenwich peninsula, the crossing would feed into the Blackwall Tunnel approach via John Harrison Way.

Both a bridge and a tunnel are under consideration by the Mayor, although the former would almost certainly meet strong resistance from environmental campaigners and from the Port of London Authority. On the other hand, the latter would be less attractive to pedestrians and carry added safety risks.

As with any road crossing, the biggest worry is that it would just add further congestion to an already highly congested and polluted area.

4. Woolwich Ferry Upgrade

TfL say that the current ferries and landing stages are “coming to the end of their life” Under today’s proposals, tolls would be introduced to pay for replacement ferries and a full upgrade of facilities. Once finished, TfL say that the crossing would be able to carry a much greater volume of traffic. However, any tolling would need a change in the current legislation. TfL also say that tolling would be dependent on extra crossings being created elsewhere.

5. Gallions Reach Ferry (vehicles and pedestrians)

Following the route of the now abandoned Thames Gateway Bridge, this would be a relatively inexpensive way of opening up Thamesmead to much-needed extra jobs and transport links. Although not a long term solution, it would at least offer some extra provision to commuters and businesses. Supporters say that it would be unlikely to create anything like the influx of traffic that the Thames Gateway Bridge would have doneH.

6. Local Gallions Reach crossing

The final crossing under consideration, is effectively a smaller version of the Thames Gateway Bridge. Planned for a similar position as the TGB, this crossing would be designed for mostly local use, and unlike the TGB it has already received crucial support from Bexley Council.

Among the more ambitious plans ruled out by Transport for London today, were proposals for a joint vehicle and train Crossrail tunnel, and a cable car between North Greenwich and Canary Wharf. TfL say that the cable car would have created “significant access and privacy concerns” and would not have coped well with crowds at the O2.

The Mayor will now consider which, if any, of these proposals should go ahead.

Reactions

The Mayor’s decision to drop plans for the Thames Gateway Bridge last year was strongly welcomed by the London Green Party, who had long campaigned against it. They are also supportive of today’s plans for extra ferry and pedestrian crossings.

However, London Assembly Member for the Green Party Darren Johnson said today:

“Building a road tunnel or crossing is environmentally damaging and will do nothing to regenerate East london. The mayor is ignoring all the evidence that new roads just cause new traffic jams. It is incrediable that he would even consider building a new, traffic generating road, at a time when london is facing court action by the European commission over air pollution.”

Labour Assembly Member for Greenwich Len Duvall said the Mayor should “come to his senses”:

“The reality that Boris Johnson has so far failed to accept is that the Thames Gateway Bridge is the real solution to east London’s river-crossing needs. While it may be controversial to the few, it makes perfect sense for the many. A Silvertown crossing would have to go under rather than over the river and should be in addition to, rather than a replacement for, the Thames Gateway Bridge. Any other proposals, such as a pedestrian crossing, would have to allow for large ships to travel and berth up the Thames and would not redress the unequal distribution of vehicle crossings between west and east London.

“I’m glad the Mayor now finally accepts the need for a further crossing in east London, but his position still makes no sense. He opposes the Thames Gateway Bridge on environmental grounds, yet proposes a potentially damaging vehicle ferry and a road crossing at Silvertown. He should come to his senses, accept he made a mistake and go ahead with the Bridge for which London had already banked around £300 million of PFI credits.”

Mayor Boris Johnson said earlier today:

“Anyone that has ever tried to cross the Thames in East London is aware of the lack of crossings and the congestion this causes. The residents and businesses in this part of London deserve better and I am absolutely determined to deliver the improvements they require. This report makes a series of sensible recommendations that we will now dig deeper into and that I will consider as I put together my transport strategy for the capital.”

Greenwich River Crosssing

Interview with Len Duvall, GLA Member for Greenwich & Lewisham

By

Len Duvall
Len Duvall OBE – Greater London Assembly Member for Greenwich and Woolwich, and former head of Greenwich Council.

“Greenwich town centre isn’t my manor,” says Len Duvall, the borough’s man on the London Assembly. “I’m a Woolwich boy.”
 
We’re sitting in City Hall, and talking about the town downriver where he lives. The son of two generations of artillery gunners, Duvall was born and raised near the Arsenal and grew up as industry in the area drifted away.
 
“It’s a place I know well,” he tells me. “I used to hop along the embankment there and play in what was one of the biggest adventure playgrounds going, the ex-Arsenal site.”
 
Eventually Len’s playground made way for the concrete high rises of modern Thamesmead. Designed for the car, no railways were ever built into its plans and many of the town’s roads did not even have pavements beside them. So while older, more connected parts of the city were able to survive the loss of heavy industry, this new train-free part of town was isolated and vulnerable from the start.
 
“Of course there is a problem with isolation there.” Duvall admits “But it has always taken more to create a job in the South East generally than anywhere else in London and the reason for that is transport. South East London has always been the Cinderella of transport and that’s why we’ve had to fight for what we’ve got.”
 
While it’s true to say that the town centre and the Peninsula have benefited from the links brought by the DLR and the Jubilee Line, other parts of the borough have arguably been left behind.
 
“Look, I live in Woolwich and I don’t want it to be the poorer cousin of the rest of the borough” he insists “but getting what we have got hasn’t been a given. We’ve had to fight for every bit of it and I’ve still got the scars from that.”
 
For Duvall those fights have led to the recent opening of the new DLR station at Woolwich and to the promise of Crossrail to come. But while these developments will undoubtedly boost some parts of the borough, other parts will not necessarily get their share of the growth,
 
“Of course it was inevitable that the development at the Dome and the Peninsula would draw resources into it,” he says.
 
“But if you want any kind of extra infrastructure you have to advocate for it, and I don’t think Boris quite gets that.”

“I think that what Boris did in cancelling the Thames Gateway Bridge was criminal” 

He’s talking now about the Thames Gateway Bridge. The crossing, which would have linked Thamesmead to North London, was supported by four of the five borough councils directly affected. However, with the planning inspector, green campaigners and Bexley council all opposed to it, Boris decided to pull out. The decision has left Duvall and Greenwich Council angry:
 
“I think that what Boris did in cancelling the Thames Gateway Bridge was criminal”  he says.
 
“There was a lot of support for the bridge, but there were two or three roads in Bexley which were opposed to it. Boris could have dealt with those issues but he didn’t face up to it. And you know one of the defining things about being a leader is being able to say no to your mates and so far Boris just hasn’t been able to do that. ”
 
Yet Len is otherwise warm in his praise for the Mayor. He says that unlike some he “never believed the stuff about him being a racist toff” and tells me how impressed he has been with his work rate.
 
“He’s definitely hard working,” he says. “I’m not sure he started out like that and I think that was one of the criticisms against him, that he was ‘lazy Boris’ but he’s certainly putting the hours in now.”
 
Despite this praise, his relationship with Boris has not been an easy one. Appointed by Ken Livingstone to chair the Police Authority,  Len’s position was handed over to Boris Johnson last year. Following his now famous intervention in the Damian Green case, Boris and Len very publicly came to blows. The result of these exchanges, was an official complaint made by Duvall to the Standards committee.
 
This complaint, which has caused Len to come under criticism himself, is still under investigation.  But despite this ongoing controversy, he insists that they remain on good terms.
 
“The thing about Boris, is that he always wants to be liked” he says laughing.
 
“He wants to know that we can still talk to each other. You’d think that he would be more worried about this investigation, but he’s worrying that we can still get on.”
 
For now though, Duvall’s main task is in representing his constituency. And in the run-up to the Olympics, what happens in the borough is increasingly coming into the public eye. I ask him whether he thinks people are right to be worried about the Olympics.
 
“Of course there are legitimate issues about having the Olympics at Greenwich Park and I think the Council need to work harder at addressing those.”

“Greenwich Park isn’t just for Greenwich residents”

“But I think some of those have to be challenged. And the issue is that Greenwich Park isn’t just for Greenwich residents. It’s a London-wide park, it’s a Royal Park, and it’s an international park.”
 
I ask him what he thinks about the press coverage that the issue has received so far.
 
“I think we have to be careful about having an Andrew Gilligan knee-jerk reaction to it” he says, referring to articles in the Evening Standard and elsewhere. “Because if you look at where it happened in Hong Kong, there was disruption but now the site is back in action.”
 
“And look, I don’t live in Greenwich, but I use the park a lot and the last thing that I want to do is to wreck it. Politicians don’t get up wanting to make things worse for people.”
 
As I gather my things together, I turn and take a look at the pictures on his office walls. Among the campaign posters for the Labour party and the Anti Nazi League is a framed picture of Greenwich and the Thames Waterfront.
 
For those of us living in the borough, this is just the everyday view of our ‘manor’, but for the rest of the world it will become one of the major views of the UK.
 
Quite what having it as a backdrop will mean for the flower beds of Greenwich Park remains to be seen.  But beyond their margins lies a wider borough far more in need of Duvall’s attention and care.