Boris Johnson started the year by hitting Londoners with record public transport fare increases of up to 20 per cent on a single bus journey and 18 per cent on some outer London tube fares. These are the biggest real-terms fare increases in the history of Transport of London.

The direct result of the London Mayor’s decision will be a big, late-recession hit on the finances of public transport users (especially those on lower incomes who spend a higher proportion of their incomes on travel).

People are rightly pointing out the injustice of public sector workers being urged to forego pay increases while Boris wades in with a massive 20 per cent hike in their bus fares. And what do commuters get for their increased fares? The Mayor who promised “more bang for your buck” is actually proposing a reduction in bus services by eight million kilometres. This is on top of his decision to start reducing the number of London’s police officers (455 fewer by 2012/13) and firefighters (16 less during 2010-11).

This is all in contrast to his natural, instinctive defence of those “masters of the universe”, the investment bankers on whom we have become dangerously dependent. Appearing oblivious to the public revulsion at the bonuses, excess and peril in which they placed our economy, Boris went in to bat for the City (leading figures from which helped fund his election campaign).

Obama has come out so strongly in favour of re-regulating financial services that the Tories nationally have realigned themselves with the United States government. But Boris is still “instinctively anxious” (David Cameron had to deny a split over the issue) and continues to warn somewhat hysterically that bankers could leave London in their thousands. This claim looks more dubious by the day as big firms cut their year-end payments as a result of Alistair Darling’s reforms and the property market looks up.

How Britain and the world emerges from the economic crisis and what regulatory shape our financial services take is set to be a key battleground in the coming months. Will Boris Johnson continue to rail against any Government action and increased regulation? The same City figures who financed his bid for the mayoralty also fund the Tory Party and may expect similar levels of support.

It’s clear that, in the capital, the Tory Mayor had no more hesitation in clobbering the travelling public with massive fare rises than he had in jumping to defend the financial services from any kind of Government action.

Is this what we can expect from the Tories nationally? In opposition, they have taken a populist line in support of Obama’s proposals. But let’s watch this space.

First published in Tribune, 31 January 2010

There are "clear inadequacies" in pollution safeguards imposed on the planned expansion of Heathrow Airport, London Assembly members have said.

Measures against the impact of a third runway were not "fit for purpose", its environment committee added.

It was also concerned that no single authority would ensure owners BAA and airlines complied with pollution rules.

London Assembly committee chairman Murad Qureshi said: "Our investigation has raised grave concerns about some of these safeguards, including clear inadequacies in approaches to tackling air pollution levels around Heathrow.

"We would also question whether the suggested noise benchmark is fit for purpose and if the aviation emissions targets are achievable." read more

On 6 January, Mayor of London Boris Johnson was the featured speaker at the launch of Policy Exchange’s new report At a Rate of Knots, which advocates the use of public subsidies to expand passenger transport on the Thames. London Assembly Member Murad Qureshi has warned that Policy Exchange’s proposals should be treated with caution.

Murad said: "In the heyday of the working Thames, it was indeed a highway – but a highway to move freight rather than passengers. Today there is much scope for increased use of the Thames in transporting goods, building materials and waste, which would have a positive environmental impact by reducing the number of HGVs passing through London.

"But I am unconvinced by the case for large-scale expansion of passenger transport on the Thames. When Transport for London put out an open tender to improve river transport in 2003 the two operators who responded reported that ‘little more than the existing service could be introduced without a large amount of subsidy over a long period’.

"Policy Exchange base their proposal on dubious statistics. They claim that Thames Clippers presently receive a public subsidy of 14p per passenger, whereas Transport for London has put the figure at 69p. This compares with a subsidy of 33p per passenger for buses.

"If Boris wants to improve public transport, he would be better advised to expand bus services, rather than cutting back on them as he’s currently doing."

Murad added: "Bear in mind that Policy Exchange was the inspiration behind Boris’s plan to replace London’s bendy buses with a revamped Routemaster, a vanity project that will cost Londoners millions of pounds. Hopefully Boris will examine Policy Exchange’s river transport proposals more critically to make sure that he won’t be pouring more of our money into another expensive and impractical scheme."

It’s now a year since I went over to see the elections in Bangladesh which brought a civilian government back into power with a huge popular mandate. During its first year in office the new government has had to deal with mutineers, assassins and war criminals.

Almost immediately into the government’s 5-year term, in February we heard stories of a mutiny amongst the military in Dhaka which sent alarm bells ringing and raised fears that the military had once again taken control of the country. It transpired that rank-and-file soldiers from the Dhaka-based Bangladesh Rifles were revolting against their officers and not against the new civilian government. This was met with some relief but the aftermath of the mutiny has caused controversy.

For example, Amnesty International has raised concerns about justice for the alleged mutineers currently on trial in Bangladesh (download their report here). In truth the suspects are fortunate that they have not been court-martialled and are being charged through civilian courts rather than by the army, as clearly officers wanted to take matters into their own hands. Furthermore, it appears that officers have somehow got involved in the prosecution of these suspects if the allegations of mistreatment in detention are to be believed. The officers should be told quite clearly to go back to the barracks and let the civilian courts get on with it.

It is not only the trials of the mutineers that have kept the courts busy, as the government had immediately to deal with some unfinished business, namely prosecuting the assassins responsible for the deaths of the founding father of Bangladesh, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, and his family on the 15th of August 1975.  The court case was successfully concluded in mid-November with death sentences confirmed on those convicted. The challenge now is to get them back to Bangladesh as some of them are abroad.

Prosecutions are also imminent in connection the war crimes committed by those who collaborated with the Pakistani army during the war of liberation in 1971. The government was given a popular mandate during the election last year to deal once and for all with this issue which has been hanging over Bangladeshi politics since the creation of the state. Thankfully the cases will start around February or March 2010 and will also undoubtedly have an impact on internal politics with the Bangladeshi community in the UK.

So where in the world but Bangladesh would mutineers, assassins and war criminals feature so dramatically in a single year of the nation’s political life? That’s one reason why I’ll continue to take interest in the politics of my ancestral home even though sadly I no longer have my father to tell me what’s happening out there.