Skip to main content
Mayor of London logo London Assembly logo
Home

Workplace Parking Levy (Supplementary) [2]

  • Question by: Darren Johnson
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
Where are you getting your information from about the difficulties of effectively enforcing a scheme? None of the legal advice and professional advice I have looked at suggests that it would be impossible.

Workplace Parking Levy (Supplementary) [1]

  • Question by: Angie Bray
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
Steve Norris is not at all in favour of workplace parking, because of the finances of it. But I was going to say one of the reasons why he is not is because is it not the truth that where companies might be prepared to take on the £3,000 for their employees, those employees would then attract tax on the benefit?

Stratford (Supplementary) [12]

  • Question by: Jenny Jones
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
It is very irritating when you constantly mention the fact that we are trying to stop poor people from having a bridge. What we are trying to prevent is huge planning blight for those people. That is what is going to happen around that particular bridge at Thames Gateway. Nobody is going to want to live close to it. Going back to Stratford, we have got one of the biggest transport hubs in Europe there. Why, oh, why does anybody have to bring a car, except in an emergency? When you talk about London-wide, you have got to think of...

Stratford (Supplementary) [11]

  • Question by: Jenny Jones
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
I am really sorry, but I just do not think you are making the connection between once you offer car parking space you are actually opening up all sorts of social and environmental impacts that nobody seems to be monitoring. Why is nobody at TfL actually thinking along these lines? I am sorry if you are stretched, but this is something that really is going to matter in just a few years.

Stratford (Supplementary) [10]

  • Question by: Jenny Jones
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
It is really not that simple, is it? Because, when you encourage people and give them the opportunity to drive, they will do it. What we have to do is always offer other options. What I am wondering is, perhaps the London Plan guidelines are actually too generous and we should be re-thinking those.

Stratford (Supplementary) [9]

  • Question by: Jenny Jones
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
That is a very kind offer, but we are a bit stretched at the moment as well. Many parts of London are not actually going to reach the 2005 EU limit on air quality. What you are actually doing is permitting any car parking spaces to go through. You are actually likely to be at a point where London cannot reach those limits, and these are legally binding limits. What happens then? Somebody surely should be advising you that you are actually reaching the point when the social and environmental impact of all these car parking spaces is actually illegal.

Stratford (Supplementary) [8]

  • Question by: Jenny Jones
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
Okay. I've been told, you can tell me if this is true or not, that you do not actually keep any sort of tally on how many car spaces you commit on each development, i.e. that they are all taken as individual developments and you do not keep a tally.

Stratford (Supplementary) [7]

  • Question by: Jenny Jones
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
You talk about a percentage cut that TfL is seeking. What sort of percentage are we talking about?

Stratford (Supplementary) [6]

  • Question by: Lynne Featherstone
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
What I do want from you on the bridge is to stop saying that if you do not want it to be six lanes of traffic and you want it to be a tram, which is a much better place to put a tram than the bus way that you are proposing - if you do not want that, then you are hurting the people of east London, because it is not that no one wants a bridge. As you have got in the consultation when you asked, 85% of people want a bridge. Of course, they bloody want a...

Stratford (Supplementary) [5]

  • Question by: John Biggs
  • Meeting date: 14 January 2004
This site is of course in the heart of my constituency, and so I have a parochial interest in it. But what concerns me in Jenny's (Jones) question are two things. The first is that she is so uncompromising and in reality you need to achieve a balance; and the second is that she is ignoring the scale of development here. This is a site that is about half the size of the City of London, where we are proposing to have 4,500 homes, 1,500,000 square feet of retail, 4,500,000 of offices, over a million square feet of hotel spaces...
Subscribe to