Mayor of London logo London Assembly logo
Home

Search questions

Filter results

Asked of 2

Meeting type

Organisation

Question by

Status

Year

  • Proposal to Designate a Mayoral Development Area (Supplementary) [5]

    • Question by: Stephen Knight
    • Meeting date: 17 December 2014
    Stephen Knight AM: Just one quick point and that is, is it legally possible to spend Section 106 or CIL money outside the boundary of a planning authority?

  • Proposal to Designate a Mayoral Development Area (Supplementary) [6]

    • Question by: Murad Qureshi
    • Meeting date: 17 December 2014
    Murad Qureshi AM: Can I raise two or three issues. The first one, Eddie, I am grateful that you mentioned the canals at the outset. It is just unfortunate they do not show up on the maps. I have no doubts that residential developers will be eying those canal sides very eagerly, because I suspect they can enhance the values of the developments by up to 40%. That is the residential side. However, I am more concerned that they are used during the works construction on the site. I think this is going to be a huge development site, over...

  • Proposal to Designate a Mayoral Development Area (Supplementary) [9]

    • Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
    • Meeting date: 17 December 2014
    Jenette Arnold OBE (Deputy Chair): I have a couple of questions, one for Sir Eddie, and one for Victoria Hills. Sir Eddie, in your introduction you mentioned that the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC) master plan was similar to the blueprint adopted by the LLDC. I know, as one of the three Assembly Members for the area covered by the LLDC, and was heavily involved in the consultation and now I keep a very strong watching brief on what is going on, that many aspects of the LLDC’s vision has changed. For instance, the LLDC plan started...

  • Proposal to Designate a Mayoral Development Area (Supplementary) [11]

    • Question by: Richard Tracey
    • Meeting date: 17 December 2014
    Richard Tracey AM: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Edward, can I first of all thank you for organising for the letter to Kit Malthouse [AM] about Wormwood Scrubs, which of course has been circulated to all of us. All of us on this side have received emails from many people who certainly were not constituents of ours but had some concerns, so I think it has helped very much to clarify, and I am grateful to Kit for writing to the Mayor about it. First of all though, I was going to say there is a lot of experience in this...

  • Olympic Route Network

    • Reference: 2009/0118-1
    • Question by: Andrew Boff
    • Meeting date: 21 October 2009
    In the light of Jacques Rogge's statement that the Olympic Route Network is not essential, will the ODA reconsider imposing the ORN on Londoners?

  • Living Wage (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Brian Coleman
    • Meeting date: 21 October 2009
    Mr Armitt, let us just get this straight. You approved Mr Higgins' package which is £641,000 a year, but your own package is £250,000. That is part time isn't it?

  • Risks (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Navin Shah
    • Meeting date: 21 October 2009
    Can you confirm that you have sufficient contingency funding and that will cover any slippage or any delays in programme or additional costs and that, therefore, there will be no requirement for building from the public purse or any other source?

  • Risks (Supplementary) [2]

    • Question by: Richard Barnes
    • Meeting date: 21 October 2009
    Thank you, Chair. I would have thought one of the greatest risks that you actually run is the security of the site during build and, indeed, during the Games itself. Are you content that the structure, where you have got Ian Johnson now heading security, I assume within the Park? I am not sure if he has got responsibility for all the 134 sites plus the free to view Games. You have got him there. You have got the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) through Chris Allison [Assistant Commissioner, Central Operations, Metropolitan Police Service] and the public order with the responsibility...

  • Risks (Supplementary) [3]

    • Question by: John Biggs
    • Meeting date: 21 October 2009
    Hopefully it creates one or two hostages to fortune and helps to raise the expectations on your performance even higher. My other question is about legacy. I do not want to steal Dee Doocey's question but it is this; it seems to me one of the biggest areas of risk is things that do not really have a proper parent so issues of legacy, such as what happens with the Stadium afterwards. If you are going for your mythical gong at the end of the Olympics it does not really matter to you what happens to the Stadium afterwards, particularly...

  • Olympic Route Network (Supplementary) [3]

    • Question by: Jenny Jones
    • Meeting date: 21 October 2009
    It sees a bit old fashioned to rely on the road network when we are putting in this fantastic public transport option. They cannot all be carrying gold medals! They cannot all need protection. Why can you not just say to the IOC that, actually, it is much more efficient to go by public transport, and not pollute east London further?