Search questions

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Thank you for your verbal report. No doubt, there will be some follow-up from others who are on the MPA about clarifications for your conversations with the Home Secretary, and the West London Tram will be brought up later on in subsequent questions. The thing I wanted to do was actually just congratulate GLA Events and Media team for doing a very good event on Sunday at Trafalgar Square.

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

I mentioned about the hospital because in times of illness, that is something that stays with people, because of all the other factors, but there are other spin-offs as well. Somebody told me recently that when you look at elders, they are not able to use the holiday schemes that are on offer, because many of those--

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Do you know that is a bit rich, really, coming from you, saying that things are being dealt with for party political reasons. Many people would say that the London Plan and your amendment is driving forward a political agenda; for example, your policy relating to affordable housing. That is a political matter. In the opening statement which you made this morning, you talked about your casual attitude to events being rather more casual than, how shall I put it, more formal parts of Government. The truth of the matter is -

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

Chair, it may be totally improper, but I am sure that members of my party would be happy to work with the Mayor on this and it would be nice if it was a GLA activity where we could write to the Refugee Council and invite them to come in as soon as possible. This is of interest, it is about people's lives and it is not something we should just leave because I do not believe that any of us holds the same position as any racist who is in charge of any position of power. We should rebut...

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 06 April 2005

The Government put in 50%. We have had less than £200,000 to pay for social services and everything else.

• 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?