Search questions

• Question by: Stephen Knight
• Meeting date: 17 December 2014

Stephen Knight AM: Just one quick point and that is, is it legally possible to spend Section 106 or CIL money outside the boundary of a planning authority?

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 17 December 2014

Murad Qureshi AM: Can I raise two or three issues. The first one, Eddie, I am grateful that you mentioned the canals at the outset. It is just unfortunate they do not show up on the maps. I have no doubts that residential developers will be eying those canal sides very eagerly, because I suspect they can enhance the values of the developments by up to 40%. That is the residential side. However, I am more concerned that they are used during the works construction on the site. I think this is going to be a huge development site, over...

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 17 December 2014

Jenette Arnold OBE (Deputy Chair): I have a couple of questions, one for Sir Eddie, and one for Victoria Hills. Sir Eddie, in your introduction you mentioned that the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC) master plan was similar to the blueprint adopted by the LLDC. I know, as one of the three Assembly Members for the area covered by the LLDC, and was heavily involved in the consultation and now I keep a very strong watching brief on what is going on, that many aspects of the LLDC’s vision has changed. For instance, the LLDC plan started...

• Question by: Richard Tracey
• Meeting date: 17 December 2014

Richard Tracey AM: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Edward, can I first of all thank you for organising for the letter to Kit Malthouse [AM] about Wormwood Scrubs, which of course has been circulated to all of us. All of us on this side have received emails from many people who certainly were not constituents of ours but had some concerns, so I think it has helped very much to clarify, and I am grateful to Kit for writing to the Mayor about it. First of all though, I was going to say there is a lot of experience in this...

• Reference: 2009/0122-1
• Question by: Andrew Boff
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

To what extent have LOCOG been successful in ensuring value for money and adequate public consultation in relation to temporary venues?

• Question by: Gareth Bacon MP
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

I am going to focus in on Greenwich, which, I am sure you are both aware, is becoming a slightly controversial area. A quick opening question: in the bid book the estimated cost for the temporary venues in Greenwich Park was £8.8 million. What is the current estimated cost?

• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

And what is the answer to my question? Why did nobody provide coaches, buses or train tickets and depend on the parents driving 300-mile round trips every weekend?

• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

My final question is to Seb. Seb, does it worry you, as I am sure it should, that we keep reading things in the press about divers having to go to Sheffield and cyclists having to drive round the M25 in rush hour during the week in order to be able to train? Nobody could have foreseen that there were going to be problems with Crystal Palace? Surely these are the people that you are trying to inspire; these are the people that you are reaching out to so successfully. Once you realised that these people had to go to...

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Lastly, can I just thank Sebastian [Coe] for his visit to my constituency and they were well received as he knows, but what he has left behind is big questions about when our young people going to be able to wear the 2012 badge like yourself and other city members! It seems a little bit odd, doesn't it? We talk about legacy in bricks and mortars and yet there is just the privileged few who are wandering around in their badges! I mean how is this? I have to say I gave my badge away when I got it at...

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Can I go back to the sustainability announcement that was alluded to earlier and is presumably what you were just referring to, Seb. What is that? Is that further commitments or is that the reality behind the commitments that have already been given? That is the first question. Then in terms of the scope of it, you have said it was kind of biodiversity and so forth, but is it sustainability in an economic, social and environmental sense or is it essentially still environmental-related commitments?