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

Search questions

Filter results

  • Operational planning with non-London local authorities (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 08 December 2004
    I notice that the surrounding county councils, of course, are the responsible authority for civil defence and emergency planning. Do you think perhaps it is an advantage that they are able to plan at a county, as opposed to a borough, level? Is that something you should learn from London's point of view? Secondly, I also note that the very helpful plans, which you have detailed, Mr Wechsler, are made available to the public, both on, for example, Oxfordshire County Council's website and Surrey County Council's website, and that Surrey, indeed, has a dedicated SurreyAlert website. Do we propose to...
  • Operational planning with non-London local authorities (Supplementary) [2]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 08 December 2004
    I just wondered if people might more logically think we would go to a London alert website, rather than a Bexley alert or a Hammersmith alert.
  • Operational planning with non-London local authorities

    • Reference: 2004/0407-1
    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 08 December 2004
    What level joint operational planning occurs with the local authorities bordering London given their critical role in supporting any evacuation in light of an incident?
  • Implementation and Partnerships (Supplementary) [7]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 13 November 2002
    Can I ask John and Victor, do either of you think that recycling rates in relation to municipal waste disposal will be helped by scrapping wheelie bins?
  • Implementation and Partnerships (Supplementary) [13]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 13 November 2002
    That's of course talks about sensible use of wheelie bins. On the other hand to go around talking about removing all wheelie bins would surely be crack-pot.
  • Mayor's Draft Waste Strategy (Supplementary) [10]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 14 November 2001
    It follows from that that I imagine you wouldn't be minded to support further applications for incineration unless you were satisfied that the technology was safe and that the communities that might be affected by new incineration proposals were satisfied that they wouldn't suffer any detriment?
  • Mayor's Draft Waste Strategy (Supplementary) [11]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 14 November 2001
    One of the things that the government has done is to set a target of some 45% of household waste to be recovered by 2010. Now recovered, as I understand it, for those purposes includes incineration.
  • Mayor's Draft Waste Strategy (Supplementary) [12]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 14 November 2001
    And as I understand it, what you envisage is that more use of the new technologies would be something that hopefully could set people's minds at rest as to what happens to residual waste?
  • Mayor's Draft Waste Strategy (Supplementary) [24]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 14 November 2001
    Have you had much discussion with government along those lines? What progress are we making with ministers there? Are they thinking the same way?
  • Mayor's Draft Waste Strategy (Supplementary) [25]

    • Question by: Bob Neill
    • Meeting date: 14 November 2001
    And the final point, is it do you think a wise state of affairs applications for certain types of plant to go to the Department of Trade & Industry? Would it make more sense for these matters to come to the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions?