Search questions

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

There is a delay because of the Government's review which has led them to refuse to consider requests for a designation.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Obviously you will be talking to the new owners about their cooperation as security is a very sensitive issue in terms of aviation. My other question, which I think is a very important one for Londoners, is has there ever been an occasion because of the lack of reimbursement where the police service has taken a decision to provide fewer police to support airport security operations than it otherwise would have done?

• 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...

• Reference: 2005/0336-1
• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

What is the role, if any, of Leaside Regeneration in ensuring that the Olympics 'join up' with local communities?

• Reference: 2005/0338-1
• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

How will you (or if not you, who) help projects worthy of lottery funding in London avoid being disproportionately disadvantaged by the diversion of funds to the Olympics.