![]() |
| London Assembly Liberal Democrats | <info@glalibdems.org.uk> |
Labour votes against cash to protect London12.00.00am GMT Wed 29th Jan 2003 The Labour Party today refused to join the Liberal Democrats in condemning the Government for failing to provide adequate funding to protect London in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. London Labour Assembly members voted against a Liberal Democrat Assembly motion that expressed dismay at the Government's delays in providing additional 'resilience' funding, 15 months after the terrorist attacks. Mike Tuffrey, Liberal Democrat Assembly member, said after the Assembly meeting: "It is deplorable that the Labour Party refused to support our direct call on Government to provide funding to the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority to purchase specialised vehicles and equipments for use in the event of large-scale terrorist incidents. Shortcomings in London's preparedness were identified and agreed many months ago but the Treasury is dragging its feet." "We proposed that Trevor Philips, Chair of the London Assembly, writes to Nick Raynsford MP, Minister of State for Local Government and the Regions, to express our dismay on behalf of Londoners that the Government failed to provide LFEPA with funding figures in time for their budget preparations. This means that the cost of protecting the capital will fall on London council tax payers. It is a national responsibility and the Treasury should fund it. "The Tory Party fully supported our motion. It is shocking that Labour Party Assembly members care more about toeing their party line than ensuring that London gets the additional money it needs to protect its citizens. Labour Party members are failing to deliver for Londoners."
Bookmark this story at:
Related News Stories:Tue 11th Nov 2003: Government fails to provide cash to protect London Mon 17th Mar 2003: Cash could be found for London's key transport projects Thu 31st Oct 2002: Published and promoted by London Assembly Liberal Democrats, City Hall, The Queen's Walk, London SE1 2AA. The views expressed are those of the party, not of the service provider. |