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

Update to the Mayors Report (Supplementary) [7]

  • Question by: Bob Neill
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
It is more than £0.03 though.

Update to the Mayors Report (Supplementary) [6]

  • Question by: Bob Neill
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
How is it possible to reconcile the effect of your budget this year, that is to say the cumulative increase of 103%, with the pledge given by the then Minister for London at the time of the Referendum that the additional costs of having the Mayor and the GLA would not be more than £0.03 per week? Now that you are rejoining the Labour Party one of you must be wrong.

Update to the Mayors Report (Supplementary) [5]

  • Question by: Darren Johnson
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
I am not actually saying bung it on the Council Tax. I am saying is the money being spread in the right way. Is it being spent on the right things? Things like low-emission zones are not happening yet, it is still all talk, it is still all planned rather than really happening. Do you believe that things would happen quicker if you actually started spending some of the money you are spending on The Londoner on pushing forward and actually making these things happen rather than just talking about them?

Update to the Mayors Report (Supplementary) [4]

  • Question by: Andrew Pelling
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
It certainly will be a change for it to become the centre of south London, because obviously the history is one of it being at the margins of the five boroughs. I would like to ask specifically about the 50-metre swimming pool, which is important in terms of it being the only 50-metre swimming pool we have in London and therefore it is an important training facility for aspiring Olympic swimmers. Would your scheme to keep the facility open after March keep the 50-metre pool open? What prospects do you see in any new centre of being able to retain...

Update to the Mayors Report (Supplementary) [3]

  • Question by: Darren Johnson
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
But you have got statutory responsibilities and duties to make things happen, and make things happen in your strategies like a low-emission zone. Do you think Londoners believe that you should be spending the same amount of money on your Air Quality Strategy, your Biodiversity Strategy, your Waste Strategy and your Noise Strategy as you are on The Londoner newspaper?

Update to the Mayors Report (Supplementary) [2]

  • Question by: Darren Johnson
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
Environmental responsibilities account for a huge part of your statutory duties under the GLA Act and half of the statutory strategies in the GLA Act are directly connected with the environment and there are obviously huge environmental implications in the others. Do you think you have the balance right in terms of spending money on the environment and spending money on The Londoner newspaper, given that you are spending about equal on both?

Update to the Mayors Report (Supplementary) [1]

  • Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
Mr Mayor, this is varying by one or two millions per week.

Crystal Palace (Supplementary) [13]

  • Question by: Andrew Pelling
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
There are quite a number of community groups there who have already set up their own forum to discuss these issues at very much a local grass-roots level. In terms of setting up our own consultative body what account can we take of those grass-roots organisations? I am concerned that we should not offend those organisations by appointing someone from amongst our number in that way.

Crystal Palace (Supplementary) [12]

  • Question by: Darren Johnson
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
Which do you think is more likely: that it remains as Metropolitan Open Land, or that, as you said to Bob earlier in the question before, there would be some sort of trade-off with the sports centre which would result in a development on the top site?

Crystal Palace (Supplementary) [11]

  • Question by: Bob Neill
  • Meeting date: 17 December 2003
I am glad that you did not require me to refuse your very kind offer to take the chairmanship from you, but I am sure you will ensure that those who actually represent the area in which it physically is are involved. I welcome your recognition of the complexities of the issue, which Bromley Council have had to grapple with for many years. I welcome your recognition that it is not anything like as simplistic as Darren makes out. Would you agree that the real answer to Darren's question is, if development of the top site is necessary to make...
Subscribe to