Search questions

• Question by: Tom Copley
• Meeting date: 08 March 2017

My question is to Victoria first of all. Given the timetable for the delivery of housing at Old Oak and the Mayor’s long-term strategic target of 50% affordable housing, how is the OPDC maximising affordable development right from the outset?

• Question by: Leonie Cooper
• Meeting date: 08 March 2017

Leonie Cooper AM: Thank you, Chairman. Mine is about the exemplar development in terms of the environmental ambitions, and so perhaps Victoria would like to start.

• Question by: Navin Shah
• Meeting date: 08 March 2017

Navin Shah AM: Thank you, Chair. Will the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and planning agreements be sufficient to deliver the substantial amount of social infrastructure that will be required for the development?

• Question by: Nicky Gavron
• Meeting date: 08 March 2017

Nicky Gavron AM: Victoria, you have given us quite a lot of context with this exchange. I want to go on talking about the industrial site. Park Royal is probably the largest strategic industrial location in the whole of Europe and it is definitely the industrial engine of the London economy and therefore a huge contributor to the UK economy. Everything you are saying about protecting it - and I really welcome what you were saying about the article 4 direction - and strengthening it is really important. You have talked about relocating some of the industries from Old Oak...

• Question by: Nicky Gavron
• Meeting date: 08 March 2017

Nicky Gavron AM: This is a question I was out of time on that I would like to ask. During the last mayoralty, there was a general perception that Old Oak and Park Royal would probably be a rather dull development with residential units and commercial units and so on but that it would not really have a star attraction. Now there has been a lot of talk about Queens Park Rangers going there and a stadium-led regeneration with everything from casinos to concert halls and, recently, there were press reports on a study you were doing on something called...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

Two questions. Firstly, would you agree that in the light of a major project such as this it would be surprising if it was not the case that there would be some changes in personnel and some clashes of personality along the way?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

): The second question is I fully understand that in the case of a `no fault divorce', which this is presented as, an agreed statement would be issued saying that everyone is walking away happy and there may be differences but we need to put it behind us and move on. However, would you not accept it is a reasonable democratic role for a body such as ourselves to delve into that a little further and see whether there is any voracity in various of the statements made about this, and how would you help us to do that? I...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

My final question is about money. Is there anything we need to know about the financial settlement associated with the departure of Mr Lemley? He was on a contract of something like £250,000 a year, maybe it was more than that.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

If you were to receive a number of written questions from the Assembly asking you to confirm or otherwise some of the more detailed points which seem to be squirming out in the press, would you be happy to receive those? Perhaps happy is not the right word.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

Could I ask you one other impossible question to answer then which is when you have finally negotiated with the Treasury your revised budgets for the Olympics, and we agree a sum, will that be a fixed sum which we can be confident to go forward with until 2012?