Search questions

• Reference: 2010/0108-1
• Question by: Steve O'Connell
• Meeting date: 20 October 2010

How have the prospects for families in housing need improved since the current Mayoralty began?

• Question by: Andrew Boff
• Meeting date: 20 October 2010

Could you, Mr Blakeway, promise me not to carry anything over from the last administration with regard to housing? Could you promise three things really: first of all, could you promise not to disappoint Londoners with oversold targets that are unachievable? Could you promise me not to raise the aspirations of Londoners and then dash those hopes and blame someone else? Could you also promise not to build a home for somebody in housing need but actually deliver a rabbit hutch? So in short, can you assure me that the strategies will be realistic, achievable and honest, which would be...

• Question by: Steve O'Connell
• Meeting date: 20 October 2010

Richard, a question for you. Would you not agree, following on from that debate you just had, that inflexible percentage targets are indeed a tired and lazy analysis of the needs of our residents?

• Question by: Steve O'Connell
• Meeting date: 20 October 2010

On the subject that Mike was pursuing about structure and powers, what thoughts have you got around devolving or increasing the powers of the Assembly around scrutiny in the new world?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 14 March 2007

One final question. Studying your documents there do not seem to be a vast number of trips being planned, for example, to other Commonwealth countries, with which Britain already has very good relations but could be improved. Is there a particular reason why that is the case?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 14 March 2007

One of the considerations might be that we have had very clear ones to Cuba, Venezuela etc, which do not strike us as being those areas which would be immediately promoting London as such an important international city. Clearly, that is a priority. Why?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 14 March 2007

It is just that you are making comments to us like, `It is good to go to New York because tourists spend a huge amount of money in London'. The implication is if the Mayor did not go to New York the tourists would not come to London. What actual value is that adding?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 14 March 2007

You could not have given those assurances on the phone?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 14 March 2007

I think it would be quite helpful if you could say the criteria that he used for the trips that are accepted and those that are rejected, in terms of the planning side. Obviously at the moment we have understood from your answer to Mr Biggs' questions that you do not accept all the invitations, and presumably you are not proactive, but what are the criteria you use to decide?

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 14 March 2007

I accept what you have said about the Mayor who clearly takes his responsibilities to running this capital city seriously, but what about all his staff? I have looked at this document [refers to schedule of foreign trips undertaken by staff in the Mayor's Office]. I brought the smaller version. There is still a bigger version. I am really quite concerned how you are all going to offset all this travelling that you have been doing. Not only singly but mostly you go fourhanded to some very nice enticing places, and really I do not see the point of this...