Search questions

• Question by: Siân Berry
• Meeting date: 07 December 2016

Sian Berry AM: I want to go back to housing again but also just to ask about public land and alternatives to selling it off. The new Mayor and TfL have made the positive decision to focus more of their public land on joint ventures and long-term rental homes, which will help to deliver the homes London needs and will create a long-term revenue stream, rather than selling them off. I recently visited Holloway Prison, which is owned by the Ministry of Justice and has great potential for this. Do you agree that this approach of not selling off land...

• Question by: David Kurten
• Meeting date: 07 December 2016

David Kurten AM: Thank you, Minister, for coming. If I may, I would like to ask a few questions on education in London. I understand from the Autumn Statement that adult education is going to be devolved to City Hall in the financial year 2019/20. What do you see as the potential benefits and potential pitfalls of that move

• Question by: Nicky Gavron
• Meeting date: 07 December 2016

Nicky Gavron AM: Minister, good morning. I wanted to ask you a question about permitted development rights, which allow a change of use from offices and other workspaces now to residential without going through the planning system. Everyone around this horseshoe agrees that we need more affordable housing and we need more housing generally, but we also desperately need affordable workspace. Change of use is offering a windfall in terms of upping value to property owners and to developers. What we are seeing in London is that rents are going up and, in many cases, land prices are going up...

• Question by: Andrew Dismore
• Meeting date: 07 December 2016

Andrew Dismore AM: Could I go back to rail devolution? In the Evening Standard today there is a letter from Chris Grayling [MP, Secretary of State for Transport] to Boris Johnson. Boris Johnson wrote to Mr Grayling supporting the idea of rail devolution. The letter says this: “Thank you for your letter of 17 April about the possibility of TfL taking on responsibility for a number [of] rail services in the London area, but outside the Greater London boundary. While I am generally a great supporter of what you are doing in London, I would not be in favour of...

• Reference: 2009/0118-1
• Question by: Andrew Boff
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

In the light of Jacques Rogge's statement that the Olympic Route Network is not essential, will the ODA reconsider imposing the ORN on Londoners?

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Mr Armitt, let us just get this straight. You approved Mr Higgins' package which is £641,000 a year, but your own package is £250,000. That is part time isn't it?

• Question by: Navin Shah
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Can you confirm that you have sufficient contingency funding and that will cover any slippage or any delays in programme or additional costs and that, therefore, there will be no requirement for building from the public purse or any other source?

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Thank you, Chair. I would have thought one of the greatest risks that you actually run is the security of the site during build and, indeed, during the Games itself. Are you content that the structure, where you have got Ian Johnson now heading security, I assume within the Park? I am not sure if he has got responsibility for all the 134 sites plus the free to view Games. You have got him there. You have got the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) through Chris Allison [Assistant Commissioner, Central Operations, Metropolitan Police Service] and the public order with the responsibility...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Hopefully it creates one or two hostages to fortune and helps to raise the expectations on your performance even higher. My other question is about legacy. I do not want to steal Dee Doocey's question but it is this; it seems to me one of the biggest areas of risk is things that do not really have a proper parent so issues of legacy, such as what happens with the Stadium afterwards. If you are going for your mythical gong at the end of the Olympics it does not really matter to you what happens to the Stadium afterwards, particularly...

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

It sees a bit old fashioned to rely on the road network when we are putting in this fantastic public transport option. They cannot all be carrying gold medals! They cannot all need protection. Why can you not just say to the IOC that, actually, it is much more efficient to go by public transport, and not pollute east London further?