• Question by: Joanne McCartney
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

I was also wondering, given that we have had extremely low rainfall this year, and it may be that this summer our rivers are going to be running very low, that when we do get any sudden downpours that we have had, am I correct in thinking that the damage to the rivers could be that much worse?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

There is a combined bit where three of the north London sewers actually come out a few hundred metres from the Olympics site. Therefore, there could very well be real problems. It seems to me that there has not been enough planning about how to actually solve these things. We have fish kills every three or four months. We have raw sewage going into the river Thames, and somehow, the measures just do not come up to dealing with the problem.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

Can I just clarify? Are you confident with your negotiations with Government that this problem will be sorted by the time the Olympics happen in 2012?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

Bob Neill [AM] I think has highlighted the paradox at the heart of this question which is that people who have airports quite often do not want to keep them but people who do not tend to be desperate to have them because of their massive economic regenerative capacity; the benefit to the Docklands has been phenomenal because of London City Airport. The question is, first of all, I am sure you will recognise that there is a minority ' probably not along party political lines ' within the Assembly who do support expansion at Heathrow and the fundamental reason...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

I agree with your responses to Tony Arbour in your initial response, but can I just make the point that very often we think in terms of the big airports ' Heathrow and Stansted'

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

Can I ask you if you have done anything with the Government about the Government's change of noise quota, which would in fact allow more 747s to be flying over London and into Heathrow?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

You obviously want board members who can think for themselves and who make their views clear, but do you think if you had the majority of elected Members who were properly accountable to Londoners, who could actually listen to the views of London on airport expansion, [on the board] you might get a different view coming out of the LDA?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

I am pleased that you are continuing to take a robust view on the third runway. I wonder if you are willing to take an equally robust view on the continuing existence of night flights and the suggestion that the cap on the total number of flights should be removed?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

You have previously stated your opposition to hidden subsidies to the aviation industry such as the absence of taxes on airline fuel. However, in the last five years, the LDA has spent nearly £6 million on projects related to the aviation industry. What do you think about these hidden subsidies from the LDA and do they need to be ended?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 February 2006

I have been a member of the LDA Board for two or three years now and I do not recall a single report explicitly on aviation and supporting the aircraft industry. I saw a report about the ancillary benefits. What we have done is we have invested in helping to secure the economic spin-offs of airport-related inward investment to London, including the initiative to encourage East-enders to get jobs at Stansted airport, which has provided a massive economic boost for the east London economy. Would you accept that that sort of initiative is very welcome and should be encouraged?