Search questions

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

I am already working with LOCOG, in fact, but I was concerned about your aspect of it and if that is something that you are working on?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

One of my roles is as Chair of London Food, which is a Mayoral Commission, and we are trying to reduce London's ecological footprint. One of the legacy aspects of all the work that you are doing now is if we can encourage farmers to start producing food for the Olympics and beyond, local food, that will reduce our carbon emissions, reduce our ecological footprint. Do you feel you have enough advice on that at the moment? Do you feel it is something perhaps you could know more about? It is an issue both of capacity building within British farmers...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

So you are guaranteeing that we are seeing no reduction whatsoever in the amount of public open space?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

So the other pieces of public open space which are not contained in this application will be in other applications or have been agreed already?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

Thank you. David [Higgins] mentioned the size of the Park earlier, but the new planning application does reduce the amount of open space in the Park by the equivalent of 34 football pitches, from 127 hectares to 109 hectares. The application is smaller than the previous one. We are getting a smaller park are we not?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

OK, thanks. If I can briefly move on now to sustainability standards? Last month the Mayor told us that now the budget had been agreed, we can expect improvements in the environmental standards for the Olympics. What changes will be made now that you have the money in the budget?

• Reference: 2007/0024-1
• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

Planned expenditure on the park and venues has risen from £2.4bn to £3.1bn in the last two years. What long-term benefits will Londoners see as a result of this extra money?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

On the Thames Gateway development issues, you said you have not specifically commented on the flood risk issue. Could I ask that LFEPA does look at the recommendations from the Assembly's Environment Committee that the plans be rigorously tested?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Even if that is not going to be a statutory function, obviously there is a direct pressure that flood risk places on LFEPA's activities. Should you not be pressing for stronger planning policies to limit new development in high-risk flood areas, and actually really take a key part in this debate about Thames Gateway?

• Reference: 2003/0325
• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 12 November 2003

What urgent action is being taken to bring fire appliances in London up to the required standard for emissions recommended in the Low Emissions Zone Feasibility Study?" .