Search questions

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 20 December 2012

With your indulgence, Chair, I wanted to cover two things briefly. The first I think is to Stephen Greenhalgh, which is that he is the lineal successor to [Lord] Toby Harris AM, Len Duvall AM [former Chairs of the MPA and then Kit Malthouse AM [former Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime]. They exercised their roles predominantly as chairs of the MPA with many members. I just wanted to, if you like, punch the bruise of Tony Arbour's question, which is that understanding and defining your role -- and you are not stupid by any stretch of the imagination. However...

• Reference: 2012/0067-2
• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 29 November 2012

It is very simply stated that we have a commitment from the Mayor's Chief of Staff about the quality and quantity of financial information we will be receiving and it should not diminish. My exhibits are (a) Police and Crime Committee monthly report, one paragraph of financial information, which says I think diddly-squat is the accounting term, and (b) is MPA Finance Committee, Resources Committee, same time last year, 24-page report with tables with accurate information on the departures from the budget. That seems to me to be a bit of a departure from Sir Edward [Lister]'s undertaking. If I...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 29 November 2012

I had a process question, which is one of the reasons I am on this earth, or indeed on this Committee. It is about the Police and Crime Plan. I was really taken aback by something you said, Mr Greenhalgh, which is about how are you going to reach hard-to-reach groups. This is a statutory document, a statutory plan, it cements the relationship between you and him [The Commissioner] in a very public fashion. I had assumed you would have a plan, a project plan if you like, as to how you are going to roll this out. You have...

• Reference: 2012/0027-2
• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 June 2012

John Biggs (AM): One specific question, then a more general one. The specific one is, where are we now with the discussions on the funding of the Kirkin and Withern pieces of work (dedicated operations for responding to public disorder)?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

A lot of people will look to their local councillors as being people to protect their interests. How do you see that working? I know the local five boroughs have, more or less, agreed a single position on the Olympics and how they work with it. Do you have any problems with any of their requests and proposals?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

I have a feeling that if Angie (Bray) were Mayor of London, she might have problems with it, as well. Leaving that flippant comment to one side, do you see, for example, London Citizens having a continuing involvement with the Olympics?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

It would be very helpful for everyone if those relationships were understood, so that if the DCMS Select Committee makes a point, and the Assembly contradicts it and has a different perspective, there is a coherent response to that, and we understand how the hierarchy works, and how the different interests are being responded to and protected and so on. This could become a rather bureaucratic conversation, but some serious work needs to take place outside of meetings like this. Otherwise, we are going to have lots of very interesting headlines, but maybe not a lot of light shed on...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

Some months ago, in Mary's (Reilly) absence, I had the privilege, as vice chair of the LDA, to be a co-signatory with you of a letter to London Citizens. They are a particular pressure group on behalf of a number of faith groups, in particular. A number of comments were made to them about housing, about training, and so on. How do you see that being followed through in the coming months and years?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

Thank you for that. Clearly, it is a bit like the situation with local businesses, that although there may be a range of formal commitments which are very well detailed and set down, individual people and interest groups might have difficulty understanding how they get into the structure of the Olympics. Say your road is stopped up, because there is some work taking place, or some development happens at the end of your street for the Olympics, and you do not really understand who to go to, or why it is happening. How is that mechanism going to work?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

One final question, and I can ask this by posing a possible answer, I suppose: who should hold the Olympics to account? Potentially, the Olympics board holds it to account; the ODA holds it to account; the LDA holds it to account; and the London Assembly and each of the individual boroughs might consider they have to. There is a Select Committee of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) which might want to, as well. Is there potentially a real messy soup of accountability, out of which everyone will want a soundbite, but no one will actually wrestle...