• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 12 June 2002

But you're not forced into set objectives and then measured against the achievement of those objectives?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

Those figures are, of course, wholly misleading, because the land on which those houses have been built was land which was available for housing and had been identified for housing. That land no longer exists, and indeed in the first list, which the Mayor produced of land which could be developed, every single one of those sites already was either subject to planning consent or the developments had been built. So, I repeat - where does he propose in the future those target number of houses should be built?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

Given that you have just told us in this remarkable new Government document, which I have to say I've never heard of, that the Mayor is going to be able to enforce his housing targets, I wonder if you'd care to tell us precisely where in the boroughs of Hounslow, Kingston and Richmond, he proposes to meet those targets, given that in particular Richmond has already objected to the targets which are being provided. They do not believe that there is scope for the amount of building which is proposed in that borough, and indeed they think the original target...

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

Can I ask, is the presumption, therefore, that's made by the Mayor's Office that negotiation is always the best way on these plans, and do you think that any sanction will ever have to be used? I guess in many ways, we are all asking this question in different ways, with a number of questions on housing about delivering on targets. But in reality, is it persuasion? Is that the best approach?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

I am glad to hear you're resolving the difficulty with Sutton Council, although the difference between 30% and 64% still seems quite large to me. I am really concerned that this is an example of how the Mayor's credibility can be undermined on the whole issue of targets of affordable housing.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

You don't want to encourage them to build houses?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

How does the rigid imposition of a 35% affordable target assist in persuading and incentivising developers actually to build houses?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

In the context of the question about Sutton, I was going to invite you to confirm that what Sutton are trying to do within the 30% is to get above target levels of social rented, where the need is particularly acute, rather than the intermediate element of the target, which obviously is important, but less desperate. But given the line of questioning from the Conservatives, perhaps the debate should move on and you should be challenging the Conservatives to say whether or not they support the need for affordable housing at the sort of levels that we're talking about. And...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

Do you consider that an unwillingness to hear personal representations from objectors to the scheme is consistent either with equity of treatment or with your own manifesto commitment to have the most open and transparent form of Government this country has yet seen.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

Is the Mayor not willing to hear representations from people against schemes? Is that accurate?