Search questions

• Reference: 2003/0420
• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

How will the RAF be reviewed to take into account the amount of precept paid by boroughs like Kingston and Richmond upon Thames and the number of police officers allocated to those boroughs? .

• Reference: 2003/0421
• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

How does the Formula compensate for the disproportionate effect of fixed costs on small boroughs like Kingston and Richmond upon Thames? .

• Reference: 2003/0448-1
• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

As a previous Leader of a London Borough with a "Weak" rating under Comprehensive Performance Assessment from the independent Audit Commission does he accept the organisation and corporate performance of the MPA under his leadership is even worst than Haringey, and if not how can he prove it and will he announce that the MPA will be inviting the Audit Commission to start a CPA Inspection ? .

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

Be that as it may, you made it quite clear yourself that there is no proper distinguishing between the allocation of these costs. You have merely suggested that there is a matching. I think that we ought to have known precisely what comes in and what goes out. Nevertheless, this really means that we really ought to be discussing once again the question of a national police force. I will tell you why it has become even more important this morning. Do you accept, as the Commissioner accepted in the response to the first debate this morning, that as he...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

During the past month Londoners have expended more than £4 million on the visit of President Bush, a man who I was happy to see visit London. I am sorry that the Mayor was unhappy to see President Bush visit London. We have not received reimbursement for that sum of money. When the matter was discussed earlier again this morning as to whether or not these things should be provided by a national police force, both you and the Commissioner raised the spectre of some all-powerful police Tsar who would be answerable to no-one if we were to have a...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

Chairman, will you not accept that the complaint about the Met having to carry out national policing means that ordinary policing in London suffers very significantly because of the extraction which is required from the boroughs. If I refer again to the question of President Bush's visit, and I am willing to lay odds that Blunkett will roll you over on that one as he has rolled you over on MPS funding in general, whilst the visit was taking place, crime in the suburbs increased. Crime in the suburbs increased simply because the Met was responsible for this national function.

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 10 December 2003

It is a mark of failure, is it not, Chairman, that the MPS is unable to say whether or not we are properly reimbursed for the true costs of these functions?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

We're very supportive of the MPA's policy to devolve as much as possible to the boroughs. Certainly on my patch, we agree with your expectation that the public should expect to see police officers around every corner. But isn't there a conflict between what we are proposing and the National Policing Plan? It does seem that if we are to continue with this policy of devolution, we are going to be opposing what the Home Secretary wants to do, which is to set targets nationally. How are we going to cope with that?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 13 November 2002

I'd hoped that we would say what are the appropriate targets, rather than the Home Secretary.