Examination of Witnesses (Questions 229-239)
WEDNESDAY 2 APRIL 2003
RT HON
NICK RAYNSFORD
MP, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
DAVID VENESS
CBE QPM AND MR
ZYG KOWALCZYK
Chairman
229. Thank you, Minister, Mr Veness and Mr Kowalczyk,
and welcome. As you know, Minister, we have taken an interest
in this subject. We produced our report last July and really we
wanted to follow up what has been happening and what measures
have been taken in London to improve preparedness. We have heard
how London is a model, a pilot for other parts of the country
and that London's resilience is a model for comparable teams elsewhere,
so perhaps we will learn a great deal more. Obviously some of
the things that you might want to say you would not wish to say
in public, so either perhaps we could go into a private session
or you may wish to drop us a note after, and perhaps we could
play it by ear if that is the case. Is there anything you would
like to say by way of introduction?
(Mr Raynsford) Perhaps I could just briefly
introduce the team. I am accompanied by David Veness who is the
Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police responsible
for special operations, and Zyg Kowalczyk who is in charge of
the London Resilience Team. I think I should just explain that
the London Resilience Team was set up at a very early stage, soon
after the events of 11 September. The Home Secretary asked me
to chair a sub-committee of the Civil Contingencies Committee
to oversee London's preparedness. We set up the team and they
conducted a rapid report, a very detailed report by March 2002.
We then implemented that report and we set up the new structure
which is based around the London Resilience Forum, which is now
in operation, and that has set in place not just new command-and-control
arrangements for London, but also a great deal of work being undertaken
by a large number of individual bodies, which act as sub-committees
or working groups of the Forum. That is the structure. We believe
we have covered a lot of ground. There is still an enormous amount
of work to do and we are by no means complacent, but we do believe
that London is now in a better state of preparedness than it was
18 months ago and it will continue to get in a better state the
more the work that is currently ongoing is carried forward.
230. Thank you, that is very helpful. Minister,
you are a Minister in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister,
you deal with London resilience issues, you deal with local government
and of course you are overseeing local government in my own area,
and very effectively too, you deal with regional government and
the Fire Service. Now, you have a very enlarged portfolio. Could
you just give us some indication as to whether you have the time
you feel necessary to deal with these very important issues we
are discussing here this afternoon. I am not in any way questioning
your ability to perform all of these tasks, but maybe you can
give us some indication as to how you are able to balance all
of these and no doubt other tasks as well.
(Mr Raynsford) Well, if I can say initially that I
think the reason I was invited to undertake this work initially
was because of my role as Minister for London at the time, which
is why the Home Secretary asked me to do it, but there is an obvious
logic given the importance of the Fire Service and the lead local
authorities towards the coordination of emergency planning for
a Minister familiar with those particular territories to have
responsibility. I do not find a difficulty in providing the time
to cover all the issues that are necessary. I believe that I can
keep a useful watch on things and learn and benefit from that
wider responsibility that I have referred to.
231. In a normal week, not that I assume you
have very many normal weeks, how many meetings would you have
which you could say were specifically London resilience-oriented?
(Mr Raynsford) No week goes by without my having discussions.
They do not necessarily involve formal meetings. It could be a
phone conversation with the Mayor of London or it could be a phone
conversation with Mr Kowalczyk, it could be a meeting or it could
be a discussion with colleagues about individual aspects because
part of the role is to ensure that a lot of other people are doing
things they need to do to ensure that resilience is in place,
so over the last few months I have been doing rather more in the
way of meetings regarding London Underground probably than other
aspects because of the heightened sense of awareness of potential
risks on the underground and the need to ensure that everything
possible has been done to deal with that. Therefore, I cannot
give an average figure because there is not an average week, but
I can assure you that resilience is very much a part of my diary.
Chairman: Gerald Howarth, who I believe
has an equally broad portfolio of activities
Mr Howarth
232. Almost as demanding as the Minister's,
but we do both share a love of photography together, so that is
what unites us. As the Chairman has just pointed out, Minister,
you are in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. The Home Secretary
has principal responsibility for counter-terrorism and civil contingency
issues. Sir David Omand, the Security and Intelligence Coordinator,
is in the Cabinet Office as is the CCS. How would you answer the
criticism that these arrangements lack transparency and perhaps
to the outsider they might indeed defy logic?
(Mr Raynsford) I do not think they defy logic at all.
I explained why I think the Home Secretary invited me to undertake
the responsibility in respect of London. That work has depended
on regular liaison with colleagues in a number of different departments.
Indeed the cross-governmental working is absolutely vital and
it is not just the Home Office and the Cabinet Office, but the
Department of Transport, the Department of Health and other government
departments crucially involved, so a lot of my time is spent liaising
with colleagues across government and that would be the case whichever
department I was in, so I do not think there is a problem. I certainly
have not found a problem to date because there are good lines
of communication with my colleagues and particularly with the
Home Secretary who oversees all matters to do with civil contingencies.
233. I think the feeling that some of us have,
and indeed I am sure outside commentators, is that if you take
the local government brief, which is yours, you have a vast range
of responsibilities and, as far as I can see, a rather impressive
detailed understanding of individual local authority issues. You
have also been hugely involved in the Fire Brigade's dispute which
must have taken up virtually all of your time at that time. Do
you not think there is a case for a Minister to be responsible
for coordinating these issues and being able to call on your expertise
when he needs it, the Home Office expertise when that is needed
and Sir David Omand's when that is needed?
(Mr Raynsford) Well, all I can say in reply to that
is that I have never felt unable to discharge my responsibilities
in respect of London resilience, even despite considerable pressures
as you have referred to, particularly in relation to the fire
dispute. There was of course a certain correlation between the
issues in some respects and, therefore, my understanding of the
Fire Service was probably quite helpful. It has not been a problem.
I do, without sounding immodest, rather thrive on challenges and
hard work and enjoy it, so I have not felt stretched.
234. It does seem to me though, without repeating
what the Americans have done with Tom Ridge, that there certainly
could be some benefit in having somebody who is not going to be
taken away maybe at a critical moment as you might be on the Fire
Brigade's dispute.
(Mr Raynsford) Well, even when I was very intensively
involved at the peak of the dispute before Christmas, I still
had time for meetings related to London resilience which took
place. In fact I think a full meeting of the Forum occurred at
that time.
235. You must tell us how there are 25 hours
in the day, though I think you have got less hair than you did
have, Minister! Anyway, can you explain where the London Resilience
Committee fits into the Cabinet committee structures?
(Mr Raynsford) The framework involves the Civil Contingencies
Committee itself, the sub-committee, which is specifically related
to London, which I chair, and then the London Resilience Forum,
which is the wider operational body, which brings together all
the participants who need to be involved in London resilience.
It is a fairly simple and straightforward chain of command. The
London sub-committee of the Civil Contingencies Committee does
not meet very regularly because the detailed work is done through
the Forum and its working parties and sub-committees which meet
on a very regular basis.[1]
236. So the Forum reports to you, does it?
(Mr Raynsford) I chair the Forum and the Forum reports
to the sub-committee of CCC which, in turn, reports to CCC.[2]
237. And how often has the London Resilience
Committee met under your chairmanship?
(Mr Raynsford) The London Resilience Forum or the
Civil Contingencies Committee's sub-committee for London?
238. The London Resilience Forum.
(Mr Raynsford) The Forum has probably met four or
five times under my chairmanship.
239. What about the sub-committee?
(Mr Raynsford) The sub-committee will only meet twice
a year. That is not an operational committee. That is the connection
between the Forum and the Civil Contingencies Committee.
1 Note from Witness: The London Resilience Committee
(LRC) now reports routinely to DOP(IT)(R), LRC could report to
CCC in an emergency Back
2
Note from Witness: LRC could report to CCC in an emergency. Back
|
