• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

If that is the case, why have you decided to issue a decision on the Prestolite factory site in Larden Road, where you think that their decision, which was supported by your officers, on the share between socially rented and housing which is affordable, was wrong?

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

I was keen to know your views on shared ownership schemes and whether they are affordable any more in London? And whether we could, realistically, call them affordable housing, given the basic salary level requirements asked from Housing Associations are reaching £47,000 as a minimum, from the last few examples I have seen in my neighbourhood, and that, increasingly, 100% ownership is unattainable and they get hammered with service charges as well?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

It so happens that Hammersmith and Fulham has the highest percentage of social rented housing in west London, it has the 11th highest percentage in the whole of London, it has 34% above the London average of social rented housing in this ward, and yet you have turned this down. What I particularly object to, in your attack on Hammersmith and Fulham, is that in your press release on the matter you have suggested they should consult Andrew Slaughter who is the Labour Member of Parliament for the area, rather than consulting the Leader of the Council, the person who...

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

It is understandable that developers are very keen on the shared ownership schemes as part of their affording housing requirements. I would just like to see more of the subsidies we are putting in for housing for rent, rather than subsidising these schemes which I do not personally think stand up at all, increasingly.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

Well it may be a good idea to ask them if they do not want it straightaway, then you do not waste TfL's money or Greenwich Council's money on a programme which no one is going to support. Another of the options that is available here is for residents not to enjoy a level of discount. Will it be Transport for London or Greenwich Council who have the final decision on whether there is a resident's discount?

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

It is interesting that you are taking a very cautious consultative approach on this project, rather unlike the debate on income support where you have not even spoken to the DWP (Department for Work and Pensions) but you have announced the date and some detail of the scheme. When is the earliest that any such Congestion Charging scheme could be introduced in your opinion?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

Of course what the studies will not show you is if anyone is opposed to the scheme locally because that is not an option they are being given to state to you. The options include charges from anything to £2 to £6 per day to enter the Zone. Who will decide on the charging level? Will it be yourselves or Greenwich Council?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

nother element of the scheme is to look at different types of vehicles and charge them differently, much as the proposals which you have for different emission vehicles in the Central Zone. How will the scheme work alongside a London-wide low emission zone? Is it legally possible to have them both running together?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

As a part of your investigative work has Transport for London considered using the mechanism of a toll, rather than a scheme, under its powers under Schedule 23 of the GLA Act 1999?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

I think this particular example highlights a problem that we have, and the direction of Roger Evans' question highlights that as well, which is that when one listens to or reads the comments of the Conservative and Liberal Democrat front benches in parliament, they are supportive of the principle of road charging. They have said again and again and again. Yet for every individual instance where it is proposed people come up with ever so clever reasons as to why that could never happen in that particular area. I would very firmly endorse Mr Duvall's comments about consultation. Certainly charging...