Search questions

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 24 October 2007

Finally, can I take if from what you said that the Mayor will continue to oppose any nationalisation, in effect, of the Section 106 legal agreement monies through a national Planning Gain Supplement (PGS).

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 24 October 2007

My apologies for not having been in at the beginning of the conversation, Neale; I was actually in the Thames Gateway meeting some residents in Bexley earlier on. I just wanted to take up one of the points that was raised and that is this: the clear view of all the partners, both in London Thames Gateway and in Essex and in Kent, is that you will only be able to deliver sustainable communities in the Gateway if the infrastructure is put in before the housing. There seems to be no evidence of that. Given that Crossrail is likely to...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

The fundamental flaw within this regulatory regime, or any other regulatory regime which you might like to impose, is that the contracts are badly constructed because they reward the operators for the number of kilometre miles that they run regardless of how many people are on the bus or whether the bus is empty, rather than making sure that the operators are rewarded for the number of bottoms they can attract to sit upon the seats. Until you get that right you will never get value for money.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

On the other hand you are left with a strong bidder, as you put it, which includes an element which you have been massively critical of in the past. None of us want the same scenario where we have a contractor appointed and then we have a guerrilla warfare of rubbishing them either from your office or from anywhere else for their performance. Is there not a concern that if you get somebody there who appears on the surface to be all right but it starts to unravel we will have no alternative; it is a time constrained contract and...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

I am interested in that but my concern is this: I very much agreed with your comments earlier on about the deficient culture in London Underground which arose from a lack of competition and your point about wanting to create contracts in that context that the big civil engineering firms will want to bid for. I think you are right. We are in a situation with the Aquatics Centre, which is after all the first major bit to get to an advanced design stage, where there is no competition because, by the look of it, the big civil engineering firms...

• Reference: 2007/2402
• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

Are you concerned that the only bidder of the contract for the Aquatics Centre for the Olympics Park is part of the failed consortium that ran Metronet, and ran a loss last year of £52million?

• Reference: 2007/2497
• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

Test question 1

• Reference: 2007/2378
• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

What is your estimate of the number of London residents per police officer both including and excluding PCSO's?

• Reference: 2007/2379
• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

Have any members of staff at the GLA's foreign offices failed to pay parking fines whilst on official business?

• Reference: 2007/2380
• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 17 October 2007

Further to your answer to question 1609, in light of your desire to increase cycle provision in London, would you advocate the removal of trains and track so that the Underground can be turned into one big cycle network under the city and do you think that this would improve travel times on the Northern line?