The chance for new housing, of an improved standard, has been sabotaged. The dream of home ownership for thousands has been thwarted.
In several London boroughs, the number is due to rise. That will be costly and damaging to local democracy.
This is a return to the agenda of Eric Pickles. It should help show the community benefits of new housing.
Our survey identified 15,875 of them. Many of these could be redeveloped to provide new homes.
Pundits are expecting a drubbing for the Conservatives in the capital. But some boroughs will buck the trend. I predict unpredictability.
Criminal gangs are supplying counterfeit tobacco on a huge scale with a resulting impact on smokers’ health.
It is not merely money that is wasted. It is spending which diminishes the amount of scrutiny that might otherwise occur.
Small firms have had to struggle due to bureaucratic inertia by some councils. At least the culprits have been identified.
A less bureaucratic approach will ease hardship and bring more money in. But the Government also needs to ensure equal rules apply for all that are owed money.
Liverpool City Council has spent an average of £7,222 for each person who lost weight. Kensington and Chelsea has spent £9,957 for each person who drinks less alcohol.
In Hammersmith and Fulham, for example, the cost works out at £55,571 for each smoker who quit.
Ruth Davidson’s call for a London Manifesto misses the point that the boroughs have different needs.
The huge variation in costs does suggest that some councils, including mine, are likely to be paying over the odds.
Hammersmith and Fulham Council have scuppered an arrangement which saved money for it – as well as Westminster and Kensington and Chelsea.
A 58 per cent rise in the tax over the last two decades should serve as a warning against further hikes.