Search questions

• Question by: Samantha Heath
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

I was wondering, John, have you read a document entitled, "Commonsense for London" which was found, up until May, on www.conservatives.com, regarding Labour are going to be planning to build incinerators in areas such as Edmonton. I was curious if you squared that with the Western Riverside or RRL bid for Belvedere? "Commonsense for London" stands at the website of the Conservative Party before the last election when they were saying it was actually Labour that wanted to build more incinerators, and I was curious if you could square that with the RRL bid for Belvedere.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

Which is most likely? Is the Secretary of State amenable to making legislative changes, or will we need to do it ourselves?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

So are you saying that a London-wide waste authority would have come to a different decision about the Bexley incinerator?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

I suspect local residents wouldn't see the decision as being any better if it was a London decision than a Western Riverside one.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

Indeed and looking at it from the point of view of residents, not just of Bexley, but all over London, what improvement will they actually see from there being a single London waste authority? What difference would it make to any of their services, apart from their council tax bill?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

Are you saying that the transport costs will be more expensive?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

So the transport costs will be more expensive. What about the administration costs?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

What concerns have the boroughs expressed?

• Question by: Samantha Heath
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

On the London-wide issue, you do say in the implementation plan on the waste strategy, that you propose to develop a modern network of civic amenity sites with a focus on recycling and re-use. I notice that only one borough was successful in transforming its civic amenity site in the implementation money of £21 million. Are you actually now going out there and evangelising on supporting a better network of civic amenity sites and in addition, my big concern is that some borough are actually restricting access to their civic amenity sites, and that really isn't a particularly strategic London-wide...

• Question by: Samantha Heath
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

Are you then going to tell boroughs - we're not talking about prescribing, but are you actually going to then try and do something to prevent boroughs from restricting access to civic amenity sites. At the moment some boroughs charge and restrict access.