Search questions

• Question by: Unmesh Desai
• Meeting date: 02 November 2017

Unmesh Desai AM: Thank you, Chair. David, I noted your answers to Assembly Member Bailey’s questions about the financial sustainability of the Stadium and so I will not repeat his questions. However, just to be very specific and much more direct then may I suggest Assembly Member Bailey was, you talked about the LLDC moving to a stable financial footing, you talked about long-term aspirations and you talked about making good progress, but you are not in a position today to tell us when the LLDC will have enough financial stability to be wound down. Yes or no?

• Question by: Navin Shah
• Meeting date: 02 November 2017

Navin Shah AM: Thank you, Chair. David, this morning in your opening statement you referred to the Olympic Park and particularly the venues that are there. They are becoming a major destination. That is good news and I welcome that. Leaving aside the Stadium, can you tell the Assembly what the medium and long-term financial viability is of the venues within the Park?

• Question by: Unmesh Desai
• Meeting date: 02 November 2017

Unmesh Desai AM: David, in the long term, can you tell us whether the Copper Box as well as the Aquatics Centre will continue to remain financially sustainable as well as affordable for the local residents and communities?

• Question by: Len Duvall OBE
• Meeting date: 02 November 2017

Len Duvall AM: Can we move on to some of the other contracts? We might include West Ham. In one of the LLDC documents - it might be in your annual report - you talk about “onerous contracts”. David Goldstone CBE (Chief Executive, London Legacy Development Corporation): Yes. Len Duvall AM: Are the onerous contracts that we are referring to the agreements with tenants such as West Ham and UK Athletics? Also, you have other contracts on catering, as well as the E20 management. You do not call it that. There is probably a technical term--

• Question by: Leonie Cooper
• Meeting date: 02 November 2017

Leonie Cooper AM: Thank you very much, Chair. I wanted to ask you about progress on dealing with the quite catastrophically large gender pay gap. You had an action plan with a series of 15 different actions, all of which, apart from one, were to be completed before the date of this meeting. I wondered if you could tell us about progress and whether you have completed all of those actions.

• Question by: Tom Copley
• Meeting date: 02 November 2017

Tom Copley AM: Thank you, Chair. I have a question about building successful and integrated neighbourhoods. I want to ask first of all, very directly: has the LLDC formally adopted the Mayor’s target of 50% for all new homes across the Park?

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 17 January 2007

I just wanted to go into the whole area of possible exposure to hedge funds, and what that may mean for our pension holders. Both directly and indirectly, our exposure to the derivative market is of concern to a lot of people, given how much coverage it gets in the business pages.

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 17 January 2007

Which mirrors much of the behaviour of the hedge funds we have got in London, because I mean London has become a centre of all that. I am just concerned whether, to the extent of our exposure, both directly and indirectly, and to what extent that limits our ability to be ethical as well.

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 17 January 2007

Can I then ask what is the current investment in, specifically, tobacco? I ask this because I raised this question in September 2005 with the Mayor, and his answer then was that he was of the opinion that LPFA was looking towards developing an ethical investment policy that would take account of this type of issue. Can I just add, you talked about employment and you said it was fine, if you like, to be investing in BAE (British Aerospace) because it gave us great employment. Is it fine to stay investing in tobacco companies that kill hundreds of thousands...

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 17 January 2007

Can I just say that for me the meeting started well but from that last response I am really quite disappointed. Can we go back to the answers to Mike's [Tuffrey] question? If we are talking about openness, then why do we not see something like that in this document? Where would you see this approach that you have outlined in this document? Basically, from what you have said, you have a very narrow definition of a pension fund that seeks to be socially responsible. Let me just say to you, you used the phrase, `It would be lunatic to...