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...

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Can I just ask Mary about the LDA's perspective. The Memorandum of Understanding has been renegotiated. We have heard the assurances today about budgets but we clearly do not know what the position will be when we get the final outturn on everything. Have you got any concerns that the Government might withdraw revenue for support grant, for example, from the GLA to compensate for any cost overruns?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

In the event that there are major cost overruns, you have not put this into your risk assessment of the project, that we would lose money as an authority from the Government in direct relation to any cost overruns that take place?

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

Yes, you are absolutely right. London generates an enormous amount of wealth - according to the London Chamber of Commerce about £13 - £20 billion - which is then taken by the Government and used to subsidise the rest of the country, if not Scotland. We can certainly do with more money. As far as Crossrail is concerned, the Mayor has said that is probably the most important project, even more important than the Olympics. Nevertheless, the Government still found themselves with a shortfall of over £300 million and turned to the City to stump up yet more money in...

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

OK, and the final thing; I know I threw so many questions at you, but will the targeted offer be distributed to small groups with multiple needs?

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

My key concern is that it is not a scattergun approach that it goes to a lot of schemes but that it is targeted on very specific small schemes where it can actually do some good. Thank you.

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 10 November 2007

Perhaps you could just give us the funding. Just pass the funding straight on.