Search questions

• Reference: 2008/1078
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

You have delegated all planning decisions to Ian Clements yet you have also said 'obviously I will be very involved and will be fully consulted on the decisions, but he will take the lead and help me.' Would you describe this process of consultation? Is there to be an objective and transparent hierarchy as to which planning decisions you will be 'very involved' in - on the basis of size for example - and will you publish this? Or, will your involvement in planning decisions be determined on an ad hoc basis?

• Reference: 2008/1079
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

You have announced that you will chair the London Waste and Recycling Board in order to work with London Borough Councils. However, London Councils has announced that the eight-member board will be 'chaired by the Mayor or his appointed deputy.' So, will you be chairing the board or will you, as with TfL, in fact leave it to one of your Deputies?

• Reference: 2008/1080
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

You believe that the LEZ 'is a step in the right direction' to improving London's air quality. As Transport for London admits that the scheme will only deliver a 0.3% improvement in air quality across Greater London, what are your next steps to heighten the impact of the scheme and prevent the 1000 deaths that are caused by air pollution in London every year?

• Reference: 2008/1081
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

You pledged in your manifesto that you "will negotiate a higher unit target with those boroughs with the longest waiting lists." Three of the five boroughs with the highest number of households on waiting lists - Lewisham, Ealing and Barnet - all failed to deliver 50% affordable housing last year. How will you ensure that these boroughs meet their clear need for affordable housing?

• Reference: 2008/1082
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

One of the most controversial aspects of the previous Mayor's housing policy - from the London Councils' perspective - was Capital Moves and decisions on the scheme were deferred until after the elections. What are your plans for Capital Moves and if - as London Councils anticipates - you do plan to scrap it, what alternative vehicle do you propose to create a pan-London choice-based lettings scheme by 2010?

• Reference: 2008/1083
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

You have withdrawn the legal challenge to Thames Water's plans for a desalination water treatment plant at Beckton on the basis of a quid pro quo whereby Thames Water will work with you on a range of water efficiency measures across the capital. Would you describe what these measures will be? When work will begin to implement them? And when can Londoners expected to see an improvement in their water supply?

• Reference: 2008/1129
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

The head of Legal and Procurement at the GLA advised a BMAC meeting on the 4th of June that Mr. Malthouse and yourself have been advised that he cannot scrutinise any of the policy developments that he has been given responsibility for as a deputy Mayor. Will Mr. Malthouse then absent himself from any Assembly meetings on policing or any meetings about any of the other topics in his portfolio?

• Reference: 2008/1130
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

According to your answer to question 804/2008 'There are currently a number of consultants who are being paid to support the transition process, but it is not intended that the fees for these individuals will be made public.' However, your manifesto stated that: 'We propose to lower the threshold at which GLA expenditure to suppliers must be reported, from £4,000 to £1,000.' Assuming the transition consultants are paid a reasonable amount for their work as suppliers how do you explain the contradiction between these two statements?

• Reference: 2008/1131
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

In your answer to my question 844/2008 you stated that you had no objection to my suggestions of a) Showing the reason for each reported payment to the GLA not just who they are paid to b) Breaking down the total reported payment to an organisation into each separate payment for each separate contract or grant payment and advised that you would be asking officers 'to assess the feasibility and cost of including such extra information, including any legal obstacles that may need to be taken into consideration.' Could you please update me on your discussions with officers and whether...

• Reference: 2008/1132
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

According to MD8 £283,000 of the cost of RISE festival and related events will be met by sponsorship income currently being sought. If there is an underachievement in sponsorship income will the GLA be required to provide supplementary funding above the £305,000 budgeted? Are contingency funds available for this eventuality?