• Reference: 2019/12329
• Question by: Steve O'Connell
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

Your answer to Question 2019/8974 relating to the Policy D6 using a “design-led-approach” does not provide a detailed methodology to evaluate “Site Context” or a methodology to evaluate the “Capacity of Supporting Infrastructure” or a methodology to evaluate the “Planned Connectivity by Walking, Cycling and Public Transport Availability”. These contributing factors are vague and subjective parameter descriptions which would be extremely difficult to define whether a proposal was acceptable or unacceptable as there are no conclusive definitions of the parameters contributing to this “Design-led-approach” criterion or for the analysis of these factors which could indicate whether a proposal was acceptable...

• Reference: 2019/12328
• Question by: Lord Bailey of Paddington
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

Would the Mayor commit to delivering a permanent solution to the on-going street racing problem on the A10 Great Cambridge Road in Enfield that is continuing to cause much distress to Londoners?

• Reference: 2019/12327
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

Further to my questioning of TfL’s HSE Director on 15 May, has TfL identified the “Human” or “Humans” who committed the "human error" which caused IA 17 780 not to be sent to the authorities until the existence and contents of this report was publicised by a blogger?

• Reference: 2019/12326
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

Further to the internal TfL correspondence you released to me in your response to Question 2018/2658, for the period 9 November 2016 to the present, please provide copies of all correspondence between TfL's Director of Health Safety Environment and TfL's Managing Director of Surface Transport on the subject of the Sandilands Tram Crash.

• Reference: 2019/12325
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

Further to your response to Question 2019/6384, did the Sandilands Incident Review Board review, edit or approve any documents ahead of their submission by TfL to the RAIB, SNC Lavalin, ORR or British Transport Police investigations of the Croydon Tram Crash? If so, which documents did it approve and on which dates were these documents approved and/or submitted?

• Reference: 2019/12324
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

In a 29 March 2019 My London article (https://www.mylondon.news/news/south-london-news/claims-croydon-tram-dr…), a First Group spokesman states ""Following the tragic incident in 2016, the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) concluded that the management of fatigue was not a factor..” Based on the conclusions of (a) the RAIB Report (b) the SNC Lavalin Investigation (c) and Fatigue Audit IA 17 780, do you agree with that statement?

• Reference: 2019/12323
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

Paragraph 3.1 of TfL’s Briefing Note to the Board (http://content.tfl.gov.uk/24-july-2018-board-briefing-note%20-on-fatigu…) about its failure to send Fatigue Audit 17 780 to the Croydon Crash Investigators, Regulator and the Police states that while TfL sent IA 17 780 to the RAIB, ORR and British Transport Police on 12 February, TfL’s own Crash Investigator SNC-Lavalin did not receive a copy until 15 March 2018. What reason can you provide for the month delay?

• Reference: 2019/12322
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

Please provide me with all communication between TfL and RAIB concerning Fatigue Audit IA 17 780 between 22 January and 12 February 2018.

• Reference: 2019/12321
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

In your response to Question 2018/1969 you state "I understand that the Chair of the SSHR Panel asked for the audit report to be sent at the 28/9/17 and 22/11/17 SSHR Panel meetings and requested confirmation that it had been sent at the 22/1/18 SSHR Panel meeting.” Please provide me with all the evidence relating to the 28/9/17 and 22/11/17 Panel Meetings you consulted to make that statement.

• Reference: 2019/12320
• Question by: Keith Prince
• Meeting date: 20 June 2019

In your response to Question 2019/6384 you stated the Sandilands Incident Review Board "did not have a terms of reference", you did not provide meeting minutes, attendance lists, or names of attendees. Do think it's acceptable to be so un-transparent about TfL's organisational response to the worst tram incident in 90 years?