• Question by: Trevor Phillips
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

I may be misleading you. We can argue about how high and all of that stuff. But specifically you were talking about the skyline which is not a one dimensional thing, it is actually about the shape of it, it is about a vision of it. Now what I am really wanting is what you actually have in mind about what that vision might be and where it is determined and how toughly it can be enforced?

• Question by: Nicky Gavron
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

I just picked out that you talked about the view of the Tower of London, and I noticed the other day when I was shown lots and lots of views of Renzo Piano's proposed building for London Bridge that it actually rises directly behind the rather famous view of the Tower of London. What would you say to that?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

I am a little concerned about your desire for there to be a dynamic skyline in London. One of the great things about London is the residents' sense of place, and familiarity, and neighbourhood, and one of the things which actually ties Londoners into London are indeed the strategic views, and not necessarily just strategic. In my patch the strategic view is of the city spread before me from Richmond Park, for example. And I am not certain I want to see that dynamically changed. But I really want to ask you, what is the place of familiarity, as far...

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

I am thinking more generally really of the desire to see well designed tall buildings, a cluster of Manhattan type skyscrapers, a Chicago skyline in London. Now for the south of Islington, where lack of green space is a big issue, lack of amenity space is an issue, the view of St Paul's is a very important factor in the quality of life of many of those Londoners, many of the people I represent, and a beautiful skyscraper designed by the Richard Rogers Partnership may also be a wonderful view, but for many I fear that would not be acceptable...

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

Lord Rogers, I was interested in your comments about the strategic views and about some sympathy with perhaps including some more modern views. My concern is I represent Islington and Hackney, and particularly from Islington you get very good views thanks to the protected view of St Paul's Cathedral. For many local residents, especially as you can imagine living on the 12th storey of a tower block, this view is very important. Perhaps going back I think to Angie Bray's point, do you think that - and picking up on John's point - do you think that a modern well...

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

I asked about the involvement of the Carnival company. The Carnival held gatherings at Wormwood Scrubs in the very early days, so I think that people with wisdom about what happened then should be part of the decision making.

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Savannah Park.

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Thank you for that. The Labour group welcomes the proposal in the report. We have a couple of concerns, though - first, that the siting of the savannah might be subject to a lot of nimbyism; I will say no more about that. Secondly, what role will the private Notting Hill company have in determining its future? Where will we go now with the work of this review?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

I know that John Biggs is referring to a situation which many of us are finding in our constituencies - that borough transport sections are very much under strength, because Transport for London is offering interesting pay and conditions, including private health insurance. I wonder whether the Mayor would endorse the private health insurance offer in the TfL package - and, I recently read, in the GLA core package as well.

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

You were surprised to learn about the health insurance. Is that something that you would consider instructing officers to withdraw from terms and conditions? What about those officers who have already joined on this basis?