• Reference: 2019/0225
• Question by: Peter Whittle
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

How many arrests did the Metropolitan Police carry out at the Brexit Betrayal counter demonstration on 9th December 2018, what were they charged with - and how many have been referred to the CPS?

• Reference: 2019/0224
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

It has been reported that some taxi drivers do not report alleged wrongdoing by app companies and turn a blind eye in fear of deactivation, or do not report alleged crimes for fear of being sacked. What whistleblowing protections do taxi drivers have should they suspect an App company of wrongdoing? Should drivers turn a blind eye in fear deactivation, or report a crime, but risk being sacked?

• Reference: 2019/0223
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

Given that unregulated Taxi App companies hold a significant amount of taxi drivers’ money at any one point, can you explain what protections are in place for drivers should an App company go bust?

• Reference: 2019/0222
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

How much annual income do you anticipate will be generated for TfL from congestion charge payments by Private Hire vehicles?

• Reference: 2019/0221
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

What percentage of NOx are produced by taxis in GREATER LONDON?

• Reference: 2019/0220
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

In a press release on 19th December 2018, TfL stated that ‘taxis are currently responsible for 20% of harmful NOx emissions and by 2020 they will be the biggest source of transport pollution in CENTRAL LONDON.’ What is their source for this statement, and how did they calculate this figure?

• Reference: 2019/0219
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

In 2016, TfL stated that black taxis were responsible for 16% of NOx emissions in CENTRAL LONDON, and they increased this figure to 18% in 2017. How did they calculate those figures?

• Reference: 2019/0218
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

Reference 16 of the calculation methodology used by states that The Real Urban Emissions Initiative “NO emissions use the NO 2 molar mass since all emitted NO will eventually oxidize in the atmosphere”, despite the fact that NO is far more prevalent in exhaust emissions than NO 2. Do you recognise that it is dishonest and poor scientific practice to quote results in terms of NO x per kg or g NO x per km, when they are actually presenting calculated figures for grams of NO 2 per kg or g NO 2 per km, which adds up to 50%...

• Reference: 2019/0217
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

The methodology used by The Real Urban Emissions Initiative to calculate fuel specific emissions assumes in reference 10 on page 4 that the concentration of unmeasured hydrocarbons is equal to the concentration of measured hydrocarbons (propene) emanating from vehicle exhausts, but no explanation is provided for this assumption. What proof do you have that this assumption is correct? Do you agree that if this assumption is false, then all of the calculated data are also false?

• Reference: 2019/0216
• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 17 January 2019

The methodology used by The Real Urban Emissions Initiative seems to assume that all of the gaseous hydrocarbons measured are propene (C 3H 6) given the equation on page 4 which states: CH r + m (0.21 O 2 + 0.79 N 2) aCO + bH 2O + c ( C 3H 6 + unmeasured C 3H 6) + dCO 2 + eNO + fNO 2 + (0.79 m - ( e + f)/2) N 2 Do you know the reasoning behind this assumption that all of the hydrocarbons measured were C­ 3­H 6 and that none were due to...