Search questions

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Am I right in saying that the target for the percentage of time spent on community fire safety at station level has risen from 6 per cent to 8 per cent? Looking at the actual performance last year, over a third of our stations exceeded 10 per cent and one of them, Sutton, according to the figures, spent 25 per cent of their time on community fire safety. Is not 8 per cent really too low as a target, therefore, and should we not be getting the average a lot higher?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

I appreciate one size does not fit all and I totally agree with that. Would it be fair to say that the way to go forward would be where there is an excellent product, that you would like to use best practice principles in order to extend those practices across the capital?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

If some can achieve above 20 per cent, can we not encourage the others too?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

You will obviously keep us updated as you make your progress round?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Indeed. That is showing up in the home safety checks which I think have risen from around 9,000 a couple of years ago to approximately 20,000 in the year that has just ended and the target for the current year is approximately 30,000. Even if you add all that up, that is 40,000-50,000 home safety checks. One or two per cent of Londoners have had a home safety check. Should we not be looking for a real huge step forward in this area?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Thank you, Sir Ken. I think we would all like to congratulate those success stories that you have just highlighted. Obviously the picture we are getting is that it is a patchy performance across London. Would you agree with that?

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Thank you very much, Commissioner. I am very delighted to hear that, although I was rather sorry that there was a delay because I can remember at least two years ago when we were in here for a scrutiny session, and you came with your Union Representative and he agreed that there really was no hold up with the Union as to getting this sorted out in London as long as they were not to be sent there instead of an ambulance, to which we, of course, agreed. You have been given £100,000, but none of this has been drawn...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

On the Thames Gateway development issues, you said you have not specifically commented on the flood risk issue. Could I ask that LFEPA does look at the recommendations from the Assembly's Environment Committee that the plans be rigorously tested?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Even if that is not going to be a statutory function, obviously there is a direct pressure that flood risk places on LFEPA's activities. Should you not be pressing for stronger planning policies to limit new development in high-risk flood areas, and actually really take a key part in this debate about Thames Gateway?

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

This is a very sensitive issue as well I think, but I think many of us understand that many firefighters have work outside of fire fighting, and that providing they are fit for work and able to do the job properly that should not be a problem in any shape or form. Is that an issue in relation to the shift pattern changes?