Search questions

• Reference: 2003/0321
• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 12 November 2003

Bearing in mind the very limited funds available in this year's LFEPA budget for Capital Projects, will you ensure that no decision is taken to begin any further construction work at the Southwark Training centre site and that a full business case including the in-depth analysis of alternative locations is undertaken before the enlarged Breathing Apparatus charging facility is sited at Southwark? .

• Reference: 2003/0318
• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 12 November 2003

How many times during the current year (2003/04) have London Underground stations been closed due to unplanned safety checks by LFB personnel? Has there been an increase in emergency (unplanned) fire safety checks compared with 2001/2 and 2002/3? .

• Reference: 2003/0306
• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 October 2003

The Transport package for the bid gives the impression of gathering together existing transport projects (some of them highly speculative and with no guarantee of funding or necessary legislative time) and giving them a rather spurious "Olympic" gloss. Why would IOC take this package seriously? .

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 October 2003

I really hope you are right, but for me that one is just a `pinch of salt" at the moment and from our experience to date. Can I focus on another suggestion which was that of the 24-hour Tube, which as we know is not in the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) contract? What is the current status of the 24-hour Tube promises?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 October 2003

It is not completely negative.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 October 2003

Do not be ridiculous, Ken! The point is you want it to be real and you want the IOC to believe it, and it is my job to question it. We both want to find the problems so we can sort them out, not to denigrate the bid; that is a ridiculous political attack. I will move on to another hole which you have to answer. There is a funding hole appearing in TfL's strategy.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 October 2003

Well, there is, and you may deny it but TfL's business plan does not deny it. So how are you going to convince anyone that TfL will be able to deliver the improvements if you are not top-slicing off everything else?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 October 2003

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 October 2003

Sorry, can I just interrupt? I want to know why you are not going to take the package seriously. Because I refer you specifically to two promises. TfL or Barbara can answer this. The Liberal Democrats usually support the bid. But I have to tinge it with a bit of reality because of a couple of the promises, or suggestions: `The Olympic Games strategy includes a requirement for a single command and control capability." But is Barbara aware that is a kind of `pigs might fly" policy because up until now they have absolutely refused to do that for London...

• Reference: 2003/0139
• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 11 June 2003

London Underground's own passenger surveys show that a key priority for Londoners on the Tube is improving train frequencies. Which trains on which lines do you expect to be more frequent by the end of June 2004, and by May 2008? .