Search questions

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 June 2014

Tony Arbour AM: Arising from the last point that Mr Tracey raised, you told us that on the basis of what you already knew it is likely to be true that a third runway is going to generate less noise than two runways. I may say that my constituents in Hounslow and Richmond have frequently heard assertions saying, “More means less”, which has not proved to be so. I wonder if you can tell us on what you base your certainty that there will be a smaller noise footprint from a third runway than there is from the existing two...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 June 2014

Tony Arbour AM: The everyday aggravation which is caused by Heathrow to local residents is not just noise and what has been indicated is the considerable amount of traffic which causes congestion to local centres. Any expansion of Heathrow of necessity means there will be an increase in that traffic. You just made a reference to the congestion zone. My understanding of the congestion zone proposal by Heathrow is predicated on there being a fourth runway in addition to the one which is being proposed. Roger Evans AM (Chairman): That is the first question. Tony Arbour AM: I did mention...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

I am interested to hear you say that all of that was agreed in the summer, because on 24 October you told the Cultural Committee here, `If we can get football clubs in there to help mitigate the operating costs, we will certainly be open to that'. Richard Caborn (Minister for Sport), on 21 October, said in the Guardian, `There is very serious negotiation going on between West Ham and the Olympic Authorities about the stadium'. Are you ruling football in or football out?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

You told us, again in an earlier response, that you have been negotiating with community groups and so on. Are you really telling the Assembly and the people of London that a viable future for the stadium as an athletics venue can be provided on the basis of full time use by local community groups, without a substantial subsidy from something like a premier league football club?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

When did those negotiations terminate?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

In summary, is football in or football out?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

You told us in your initial response that the IOC was quite clear what the future use of this stadium was going to be. How can it possibly be that you even entered into any discussions at all with West Ham if the future of the stadium is going to be as an athletics stadium?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

You have told us that you are not going to exist, you think, immediately after the Games. You think it is going to wind up, so that freehold which you have will be transferred to whom?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Well I had always known that John Biggs was a big cheese of the local community, it is quite clear he sees himself as the Big Mac of the local community. This question, Mr Higgins, I am raising because you described to my colleague Bob Neill the crossovers between yourselves, LOCOG, and the LDA. I am really concerned that the crossovers should always be crossovers, rather than areas of conflict. I am particularly interested in the relationship between yourselves and the LDA, particularly as you have already told us this morning that they are responsible for the land assembly as...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

I see. Finally, on the question of ownership and existence after the Games have finished, as far as you are concerned, the ODA will have no say in legacy at all?