Search questions

• Question by: Caroline Russell
• Meeting date: 07 September 2017

Caroline Pidgeon MBE AM: Thank you. I have three specific questions I would like to ask you. To fulfil your vision, your modelling shows you are going to need a nursery in place by 2020 and another two years later. I am pleased you have made progress on this in your work. We are rapidly approaching 2018 now. Are you confident the funding is going to be in place and that they will be completed on time?

• Reference: 2017/2836
• Question by: Caroline Pidgeon
• Meeting date: 13 July 2017

Why does your draft Transport Strategy contain no proposals to change the Congestion Charge or bring in road pricing to tackle congestion?

• Question by: Andrew Dismore
• Meeting date: 08 March 2017

Andrew Dismore AM: Thank you, Chairman. Could I ask David [Bellamy] and Fiona [Fletcher-Smith]? May I explore with you the pros and cons of HS2 terminating temporarily at Old Oak Common? In July last year [2016] the Mayor said, quote: “I have been clear that I would like to understand whether HS2 could terminate at Old Oak on a temporary basis to minimise disruption and allow for a better overall solution for Euston Station. This is something that I am discussing with Transport for London.” Could you confirm what the results of that discussion were and whether Old Oak Common...

• Reference: 2015/2494
• Question by: Caroline Pidgeon
• Meeting date: 08 September 2015

Given the extensive political opposition to a third runway at Heathrow and the inevitable legal and planning challenges that will arise it is almost certain expansion is unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future at Heathrow. In light of these realities do you believe sufficient attention has been given to improving surface transport to ensure that the significant spare air capacity at existing airports in the south east is fully utilised.

• Reference: 2015/1238
• Question by: Caroline Pidgeon
• Meeting date: 21 May 2015

What discussions have you had with the Department for Transport on the further devolution of suburban rail services to Transport for London?

• Reference: 2015/0421
• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 06 February 2015

Could you set out the aims and objectives of the Draft Further Alterations to the London Plan document as laid before the Assembly, and how the Alterations address the issues raised by the Inspector and the Assembly and the changes to national policy?

• Question by: Stephen Knight
• Meeting date: 06 February 2015

Stephen Knight AM: We have already heard a little bit about the issues of housing supply and the deficiencies in the Plan and so I will not repeat some of what has been said. However, it is clear that the inspector was willing to sign off this plan really only on the basis that there would be a further review to address the issues before 2016. I noticed in the response that the Mayor has made to the inspector - or it may have been to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) - that a review is already...

• Question by: Fiona Twycross
• Meeting date: 06 February 2015

Fiona Twycross AM: I am going to shift the question a little bit away from housing. Obviously, we all recognise the need for housing, but there is a danger that we create a false dichotomy between the use of land for housing and the use of land for other purposes. Does the Plan recognise and deal with the tension between the need to provide land for housing and the need for all other uses including employment and infrastructure?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 06 February 2015

Jenny Jones AM: On this substantive issue, I am very concerned that you are actually releasing too much industrial land because the vacancy rate on industrial land has actually halved in the past 15 years and is now lower than retail vacancies. I am concerned that you are talking about surplus land when, actually, it is not surplus because small businesses still need to be near centres of population and they still need to be near town centres. I just wonder how much research you have done on this.

• Question by: Steve O'Connell
• Meeting date: 06 February 2015

Steve O’Connell AM: First of all, I would like to thank you, Sir Edward, and your officers for the work involved in bringing forward these alterations. I note your continuing protection of the environment and green spaces and I am encouraged by your comments around self-build. I know my colleague Andrew [Boff AM] will turn to the housing question a little bit later. I would like to pick up on two points, one around parking standards and another around the first time that community pubs have been commented on in the London Plan. On the parking standards, I noticed that...