Search questions

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

Do you know, I am flabbergasted by this, Deputy Mayor. You have just told us that these low-energy bulbs are in fact a transitional thing, because LED bulbs are going to come in which are going to be efficient, but at the same time your publicity has told us that these light bulbs are going to have a very long life. Clearly it is quite pointless that they should have a long life if something more permanent is going to come along. It is a bit like somebody trying to sell me a Betamax video recorder! The whole thing is...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

One final thing on this; I believe the whole thing is completely ludicrous. This refers to DIY Planet Repairs. Whenever we switch on any of the computers in this building a big thing comes up with an exclamation mark saying `DIY Planet Repairs'; utterly meaningless. I can well understand why there is an exclamation mark there; this has cost the Council Tax payers of London more than £1.25 million! Can you point to any `DIY Planet Repair' which the Mayor and this campaign have actually achieved?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

Of the 30,000 a year that you are predicting?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

Mr Watts, that is not actually true. In the Mayor's press release ' which I suppose in this case is Nicky's press release ' a 63% take-up was predicted, which is four million. Your figure bears no relationship to the press release and the fact that you only made available this tiny number of light bulbs suggests that there was never any truth in the matter at all.

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

It's very interested to hear you say that all of this is supposed to encourage people to take up these things. The total number of people who have actually taken up the insulation grants so far is barely 3,000 homes of the 30,000. The thing you principally have been trumpeting to make Londoners aware of how they can cut carbon issues has related to the exchange of light bulbs. Now the Mayor in his press release predicted that there was going to be a 60% take up of London's population of that; that is around four million people. I wonder...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

Perhaps to address another part of your presentation, which links to this, you talked about the need for the LDA to have credibility with business, but are there not occasions when business has to have credibility with Londoners and the LDA needs to say that the employment, training and mentoring practices of the private sector in London are short-sighted, are disadvantaging London and, in the end, will disadvantage those businesses? I am being quite strident in pursuing that. Perhaps your Chair should answer that.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

Is that a priority for the LDA?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

Which other priority is a lesser priority as a consequence of that? What I am trying to get my head around is the extent to which" Obviously in life you have to pursue a lot of relatively easy targets and priorities, but you need to take some challenging ones on now. I think, and I think a lot of my colleagues and constituents believe, that that is a really vital one for London and we have not done enough on it yet.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

My question is on joined-up government and all these relationships with the ODPM, the DCMS, the DTI, GOL and all the rest of it. Did anybody inform you of the Government's new scheme to move some 80,000 jobs out of London? In a sense, there is a contradiction between the long-term plan that London is going to increase, and the Government actually trying to cut down the increase by moving jobs out of London. Was there any consultation with the LDA on this?