• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

All I am suggesting is that it might be better to do it on an incremental basis - a little bit each year - without the great fanfare of publicity.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

Finally, what discussions have you had with the surrounding local authorities to try to ensure a similarity of approach? I think, for example, of the developments on the edge of Bexley, Erith, Thamesmead and so on - where it is desirable to have the same approach to developments in the flood plain as there is in Dartford and just down river. Have you been discussing that with neighbouring authorities?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

Given that the Environment Agency plans suggest, for example, that if they are going to maintain flood defence for 30 years afterwards - which seems to be their plan - that could increase the cost of a new 40-home estate by about £100,000. Are you prepared, if need be, to make trade-offs in some of the other targets you are setting in order to achieve the development?

• Question by: Samantha Heath
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

You said that you had no powers, but you do have the delightful Lord Rogers in your team. When he did the original development brief for Terminal 5, he had some interesting flooded lagoons in re-routing the rivers we are talking about; but they were dropped out successively. Having spoken to the developer, who hails from Scotland, perhaps Lord Rogers could reincorporate that. Since you have such a persuasive way with him, perhaps you could prevail on him to re-include fluvial flooding in the development. My question was not principally to do with the flood defences. Speaking as a civil...

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

Richard Barnes: That is a novel concept for those of us who live in west London - unless we listen between the flights. The Chair: Yes, we hear too much. [Laughter.] Richard Barnes: There will clearly be a major environmental impact on an area which is basically Middlesex clay. It was a sludge works, as you know. The water table there is relatively high. Two of the conditions that the Government have placed on the development are the extension of the Piccadilly line and that of the Heathrow Express, but no mention has been made of CrossRail. Would you look...

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

Clearly we are not going to reach my question on the green sheet, but there are The Two Rivers at Terminal 5 that will need diverting. What planning powers do you have to protect the environment where the largest building project in Europe has now been given permission?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

What impact do you think the decision by Government to require developers building on flood plains to pay for some of the defence improvements is likely to have on the prospects of development in the Gateway?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

The Environment Agency, in their response to the draft SDS, raise concerns about the treatment of flood risk in the Thames Gateway, and say that the key issues addressed do not include the management of flood risks. Are you proposing to take that concern on board and look again at that aspect of the SDS? If we are to do it, it clearly needs to be addressed, doesn't it?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

Returning to the spirit of the question, and following Bob Neill's point, I do not think it is widely known, because it is not the most interesting issue in the world, but a large part of the budget of the LDC was spent on this very issue of flood protection in the Royal Docks area on the Isle of Dogs. Without that, the development would not have been possible - and clearly it will not be possible within the limited resources you have. The end of the question is, is there a role for London government to co-ordinate - to...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 21 November 2001

You referred to the "protection" offered by the Thames Barrier degrading faster than anticipated. Do you know what assessments are being made of the Thames Barrier's ability to cope with the clearly greatly increased usage that will come over the next century? Linked to that, in all your discussions about emergency planning in the last month or two, has any consideration been given to what we will do in London in the unfortunate eventuality that, for whatever reason, the Thames Barrier does not work at all?