Search questions

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Mr Higgins, you just mentioned the site. You said it was 'highly contaminated'. Those were your words. Now, in marked contrast to your brochure of photographs here, I have got some photographs which actually show the contractors at work. They are digging up, if that is the right phrase, a whole lot of dust which is blowing over the surrounding countryside and the surrounding residential areas. If that site is highly contaminated, don't you think that enormous efforts should be made to damp down the dust and make sure that the dust does not go onto surrounding areas?

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Are you aware that there is a suspicion that there might be radioactive waste on the site? There were two instances I have come across. One was dumped in 1959 and another was dumped in 1953 and in both instances they say that the waste was possibly radioactive.

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

I attended the meeting in Hackney Wick about a couple of weeks ago when people were actually complaining about the dust that was flying around, particularly over the Clays Lane Estate and in that general area. People actually said, 'Having inhaled this dust I felt a real sore throat and burning eyes and burning lips,' and people were coming up to me after the meeting saying, 'Can you do anything about this?' I felt that there was a real concern. Now I know that there has been quite a lot of contamination on that site. I have documents here which...

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Alright, and your contractors, those people who are actually working on the site, driving these vehicles and what have you, are they properly protected, using properly protective clothing and all the rest?

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Alright, are you aware that the River Lee has been tested for radioactivity and in fact I have a Capita Symonds document here which says, `That the levels were slightly higher than expected, not high enough to cause great concern,' and identifies, `Elevated levels of radioactivity above levels considered to be natural background level for the area'.

• Reference: 2007/0056-1
• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

The wind turbines/solar panels on LDA building cost £436,000 to install (including £156,276 subsidy from the Energy Saving Trust). How much more has subsequently been spent on maintenance and what is the value/kWh of the electricity (on a monthly or quarterly basis) that has been generated by this scheme?

• Reference: 2007/0057-1
• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

How much did the relocation from Devon House to the Palestra building cost?

• Reference: 2007/0058-1
• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

The LDA Annual Report states that the lease on Devon House expires in September 2009 and costs £192,000 per annum. Is the LDA able to recoup any of this expenditure by sub-letting or alternative use of this space?

• Reference: 2007/0064-1
• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

There is considerable concern amongst residents near the Olympic site about large quantities of dust being generated by contractors. Residents are also concerned that the dust may be contaminated. What tests were conducted by the LDA during the remediation process to check that the dust is not contaminated and can the concerned residents have access to the test results?

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

You have said the project is on track. You have also said the costs are rising substantially. Those two statements do not seem to sit very happily together to me. How can you be on track if the costs are rising substantially? The point I would like to make to you is that Londoners are contributing £625 million to this project and we have been assured by the Mayor that that money will go into infrastructure which will be a positive thing that Londoners can see their money has paid for. Do you support the fact that Londoners should not...