Skip to main content
Mayor of London logo London Assembly logo
Home

Search questions

Filter results

Asked of 1

  • Outstanding and future challenges

    • Reference: 2016/0679
    • Question by: Navin Shah
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    As the Mayor departs City Hall, what challenges remain for the LLDC and is the organisation fit for purpose in the short, medium, and long term?
  • LLDC Value for Money (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Andrew Dismore
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    Andrew Dismore AM: I would like to ask you some questions about the Orbit [Arcelor Mittal Orbit] and perhaps I could start by just establishing what I think are the agreed facts. You originally expected the Orbit to have 350,000 visitors a year. In 2014/15 there were only 124,000, a third of those forecast. In 2015/16 the target is 163,000 but by September 2015, halfway through the year, only 68,000 people had come and of course that was over the summer. That is 42%. You are losing about £10,000 a week. The 2016/17 visitor target is 239,000, rising to 261,000...
  • LLDC Value for Money (Supplementary) [2]

    • Question by: Len Duvall OBE
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    Len Duvall AM: Can we go back to the issues of transparency? You rightly cited the Olympics. It was probably was the best and most transparent Olympics around some of these issue. However, you do seem to have gone back and you have made this problem for yourself around the issue of the freedom of information (FOI) request from Sir Richard Hunt, who is a member of the Charlton Athletics Supporters Trust, by the way that you have dodged and swerved and not answered the issues in terms of getting to grips with the actual issues that people are asking...
  • LLDC Value for Money (Supplementary) [4]

    • Question by: Murad Qureshi
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    Murad Qureshi AM: Whilst we are on confidentiality, can I ask why questions still exist around the power to veto the ground-share of the Olympic Stadium? Why do there seem to be questions remaining about who can veto the ground-share remaining on the stadium?
  • Outstanding and future challenges (Supplementary) [2]

    • Question by: Fiona Twycross
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    Fiona Twycross AM: Thank you. I wanted to ask a bit more about the LLDC’s financial resilience and the risks. You have alluded to risks and they have been raised by others. What risks do you believe a global economic downturn would pose to the LLDC and its priorities for delivery?
  • Outstanding and future challenges (Supplementary) [3]

    • Question by: Tom Copley
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    Tom Copley: If I could turn to housing, to what extent could global financial uncertainty affect the affordable housing totals for the remaining neighbourhoods on the Olympic Park?
  • Outstanding and future challenges (Supplementary) [4]

    • Question by: Andrew Dismore
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    Andrew Dismore AM: In answer to Fiona [Fiona Twycross AM] and others, you again went back to the issue of transparency and I would like to come back to the West Ham deal. I have here a copy of the West Ham concession agreement, which I assume you have read. [--] Andrew Dismore AM: This is the redacted copy. I do not understand, for example, why in section 28 your arrangements for the police are redacted. Presumably, that is something that we can get from the police anyway. If you look at this document, page after page after page is...
  • Transforming east London (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Len Duvall OBE
    • Meeting date: 02 March 2016
    Len Duvall AM: Chair, can we move to some of the issues around skills? You have a reasonable record on this. Can you tell us what lessons over the last four years you have had that you have learnt about delivery in the skills area?