Havering has two important regional issues. The first is the nine-month closure of the Gallows Corner flyover. This is causing local and east London disruption. The second is significant damage to London’s housing strategy. This is the result of the non-funding of Beam Park station by the Treasury.
Keith isn’t interested in Beam Park but is fascinated by Gallows Corner. He has asked Mayor Khan two questions in three months about Gallows Corner (see A & C in the Addendum). Why is this Keith’s priority?
The Gallows Corner fiasco1 will finish despite repairs making glacial progress. Then the chaos will stop. Keith focuses on Gallows Corner because it’s obvious.
Beam Park is a more challenging. There aren’t easy answers and it’s of critical regional importance. Beam Park’s housing development must have a station built. This looks easy because it doesn’t need new track or a realignment of the east London network. Unfortunately, governments are hypnotised by Treasury orthodoxy. Their grim reductionist thinking means they won’t fund the station. And that means thousands of houses won’t be built. The government’s housing policy is collateral damage to a wrong-headed economic analysis.
Housing is a government priority and Beam Park station will unleash a bonanza.
“….there’s been a mix of recriminations and negotiations about how and why the station, which could serve as many as 20,000 homes, wasn’t authorised to be built.”2
Mayor Khan has approved £32.747m to make Beam Park happen.3 And the Treasury is stalling. Mayor Khan is fighting hard for Beam Park but what is Keith doing?4 He asked a question about bus drivers getting hot in their cabins. (see Addendum B).
Question C at the November meeting (see Addendum at 3 hours 20) was developed by Keith who asked for a period of temporary reopening for Christmas. This positive proposal will help traders if implemented. Unfortunately, the principal barrier is Essex and Suffolk Water, which is out of the Mayor’s control.
Keith was directly elected and should be laser focused on critical local issues.
Notes
1 Andrew Rosindell, Boris Johnson and Gallows Corner, 2014-20 – Politics in Havering
2 Delayed Beam Park railway station moves forward with new planning application
3 DD2452 Beam Park Station | London City Hall
4 Margaret Mullane MP for Dagenham and Rainham has been more proactive Beam Park station update – Margaret Mullane
Addendum: Keith Princes questions to the Mayor: Sept-Nov 2025
- Gallow’s Corner Question No: 2025/3095 Keith Prince Can you provide an update on TfL’s current timeline for the development project at Gallow’s Corner?1
- Freedom of Speech Question No: 2025/3385 Keith Prince What steps are you taking to ensure Londoners have the right to freedom of speech?2
- Gallows Corner (2) Question No: 2025/3693 Keith Prince What consideration have you given to a compensation scheme for businesses at Gallows Corner who have been disrupted by the closure of the flyover and roundabout?3
B London Assembly (Mayor’s Question Time) | London City Hall
C Keith’s question was given a full reply by the Mayor London Assembly (Mayor’s Question Time) | London City Hall
Politics in Havering 
Sent from my iPhone
LikeLike
There is nothing here.
LikeLike
There is no prospect of a proposed Beam Park station due to its proximity to Rainham and Dagenham Dock stations, but the fake provision of a station provided the justification for approving housing/tower block planning applications that should’ve otherwise been opposed due to the absence of parking in an isolated area, making almost all of the approved applications legally unsafe.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment
I’m not sure what the criteria is for spacing of stations but in 2018 it was seen as viable. The style of housing is entirely appropriate and the bolt-on parking etc., will be factored in. The development will be legally safe once the station is in place….In fact they are predicated on each other. No station, no housing.
LikeLike
Potentially, Beam Park is viable, but only by drawing passengers away from the adjacent stations, undermining their viability, but I understand there are other freight traffic reasons not to proceed.
The approved 16 high tower block above the station has no parking and only approved due to the promise of a station and this applied to the other nearby applications too, albeit I’m not sure how much has been built.
However, the point is, the station was never a broken promise as it had never been approved by the Minister for Transport, it was a LIE used to get planning committee approval for high rise housing with no parking, public transport or amenity in an isolated area.
The area was designated as a GLA Housing Zone and the station had credibility as it had the support of the Mayor, except it wasn’t a Mayoral decision, and the Minister’s view wasn’t mentioned.
LikeLike
Thank you for your comment
As I understand the issue it was a ‘nod and wink’ agreement with the Conservative government. A bit like a chicken and egg: What came first? The spacing of stations in Newham can be a template as it is based on population densities. Unfortunately the mayor doesn’t have decisive power and the division of decision-making makes for fiascos like this.
LikeLike