Skip to main content
Mayor of London logo London Assembly logo
Home

Search questions

Filter results

Asked of 2

  • Taking forward the recommendations (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Andrew Boff
    • Meeting date: 05 June 2013
    Andrew Boff (AM): I do hate it, Professor Travers, when you come here because you answer all my questions before I have asked them. But do you think the Mayor is missing a trick in just lobbying for London when he should actually be lobbying for cities? It strikes me that the 'carrot crunchers' have their lobby groups and unfortunately the cities do not seem to have a cohesive one.
  • Taking forward the recommendations (Supplementary) [2]

    • Question by: Richard Tracey
    • Meeting date: 05 June 2013
    Richard Tracey (AM): Tony, what makes you any more optimistic that the Government is going to accept these ideas you have put forward than they did in dealing with business rates? They first of all said that they were going to hand the whole of business rates over as I recollect and it finished up being 50%, so what is the prospect?
  • Taking forward the recommendations (Supplementary) [3]

    • Question by: Fiona Twycross
    • Meeting date: 05 June 2013
    Fiona Twycross (AM): I think you made some really interesting points on English devolution and in one sense localism represents a very basic form of devolution. Did the recommendations of the report represent radical localism? If so, what benefits could devolving revenue-raising powers bring to the rest of England?
  • Land and property taxes (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Nicky Gavron
    • Meeting date: 05 June 2013
    Nicky Gavron (AM): Thank you for the report and thank you so much for the way you are amplifying it, Tony. This is a little bit different from what Jenny Jones and Murad Qureshi have been saying but it is building on that. Do you think if there was a targeted form of land tax on those sites which have planning permissions, and we know now we have 211,000 homes sitting on land with planning permission at the moment, that would help bring forward housing?
  • Land and property taxes (Supplementary) [2]

    • Question by: Murad Qureshi
    • Meeting date: 05 June 2013
    Murad Qureshi (AM): Can I be bold enough, Tony, to ask you things that you have not really touched on in your report? The first is mansion taxes. Our sister city New York has a 0.5% mansion tax for properties over $2 million. Do you see a place for something similar if it was hypothecated to build social housing, for example?
  • Balance of Taxation

    • Reference: 2012/0218-1
    • Question by: Jenny Jones
    • Meeting date: 24 October 2012
    Should we shift the balance of taxation in London from income to wealth, for example with a land value tax?
  • Localisation of Business Rates

    • Reference: 2012/0219-1
    • Question by: Stephen Knight
    • Meeting date: 24 October 2012
    What evidence have you received so far concerning the so called "localisation" of business rates?
  • Weaknesses and Opportunities for London's Funding

    • Reference: 2012/0220-1
    • Question by: John Biggs
    • Meeting date: 24 October 2012
    What are the principal weaknesses in, and opportunities for, London's funding?
  • Tax Devolution

    • Reference: 2012/0221-1
    • Question by: Gareth Bacon MP
    • Meeting date: 24 October 2012
    Stamp Duty and Income tax have both been mooted as potential candidates for tax devolution from Whitehall to London. How would you see the devolution of these taxes working, in practice? Which do you see as a more attractive option?
  • Balance of Taxation (Supplementary) [1]

    • Question by: Murad Qureshi
    • Meeting date: 24 October 2012
    Murad Qureshi (AM): I just want to briefly go back to land valuation taxation if you don't mind, given Roger's [Roger Evans AM] comments. I hear what you are saying about local planning concerns that have to be addressed by local authorities, I hear what you say about anything being proposed having to be national and not just London, but you would accept that it would discourage land banking and a fair amount of empty sites? Forget empty properties, there are major sites lying empty. Would it not encourage those being moved on at least and the promotion of jobs...