Search questions

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 06 February 2015

Jenny Jones AM: On this substantive issue, I am very concerned that you are actually releasing too much industrial land because the vacancy rate on industrial land has actually halved in the past 15 years and is now lower than retail vacancies. I am concerned that you are talking about surplus land when, actually, it is not surplus because small businesses still need to be near centres of population and they still need to be near town centres. I just wonder how much research you have done on this.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 17 December 2014

Darren Johnson AM: I hear what you say about Wormwood Scrubs and the issue of permeability. I do not at all doubt the need to improve permeability. However, surely, this type of thing can be done through sensible negotiations between boroughs. You do not need to include it in the MDC to ensure pathways and gates to public open space, do you?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 17 December 2014

Jenny Jones AM: I have not been convinced by these arguments about keeping Wormwood Scrubs open space inside the MDC. The council that currently has it in their borough is against it. The Friends of the Open Space are against it. It looks like a mayoral land grab. It does not look like a coherent plan. Sir Edward Lister (Mayor's Chief of Staff): If I may, it is a coherent plan, but they do not agree with it. Jenny Jones AM: Do you not think you should be interested in localism: that decisions for local people for local land should...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

That is very welcome. Will you actually write that into the contracts, and has it already been written into those contracts that have already been let?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

Again, will there be independent monitoring, as I mentioned earlier with the sustainability issues, of contracts, compliance, and such like to ensure that it does happen, and it is actually delivered?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

That sounds reassuring, because obviously, we want to prevent profiteering, and we want to prevent these big companies moving in and just profiteering without actually putting anything into the event or into the long term. However, in terms of the way the legislation that Peter (Hulme Cross) has shown me is being drafted, it does seem to imply that certain words would be banned in certain combinations. I am all for making sure that Nike or whoever cannot profiteer from this event, but if the local café wants to run an Olympics event night or something like that, I do...

• Reference: 2005/0276-1
• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

What alternative sites are being provided for the Traveller families displaced by the Olympics?

• Reference: 2005/0278-1
• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

Given the massive potential for waterborne freight in the Lower Lea Valley, will the Olympic construction contracts require that construction companies make full use of the waterways surrounding the Olympics site to transport materials and waste?

• Reference: 2005/0279-1
• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

What will be done to ensure that the potential for waterborne fright in the Lower Lea Valley is maximised during the legacy phase of the Olympics?

• Reference: 2005/0280-1
• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

As a new lock at the junction of Prescott Channel and Abbey Creek could significantly increase the potential of the River Lea to carry freight, why does planning report PDU/0909a,b,c,d/02 stipulate that no new impounding structures be permitted?