Search questions

• Reference: 2016/4049
• Question by: Caroline Pidgeon
• Meeting date: 02 November 2016

Please state what are London and Partners policies on transparency and in particular its policies towards: (1) Publishing a register of gifts, expenses and hospitality for all board members and senior staff (2) Proactively disclosing information and responding to requests for information as if they were covered by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (3) Providing details of senior employee pay and remuneration

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

Am I right in saying that the target for the percentage of time spent on community fire safety at station level has risen from 6 per cent to 8 per cent? Looking at the actual performance last year, over a third of our stations exceeded 10 per cent and one of them, Sutton, according to the figures, spent 25 per cent of their time on community fire safety. Is not 8 per cent really too low as a target, therefore, and should we not be getting the average a lot higher?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

If some can achieve above 20 per cent, can we not encourage the others too?

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

I take the point, wholly, that the train operating companies should be paying for their policing. Historically they do not. I do not think the public is going to be much impressed by this turf war.

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

I wholly agree that this is best served to get sorted out pragmatically and at borough level, but can I suggest that it might be helpful, if it is not already happening, for the MPA to take the lead in discussion with what used to be the ALG, London Councils, as I think it is now, to try and start some thinking about how to rationalise what is becoming an increasingly complex consultative structure with often the same people going to lots of meetings saying exactly the same thing.

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

The main thrust of the question is about the Government recognising the unique need to protect its capital city from terrorist and major incidence attacks. Is there any sign at all that there is any recognition?

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 08 November 2006

You wrote a very comprehensive letter to the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and got a response from Mike Reid at the Fire and Resilience Policy Division. On two occasions in his letter he says these are `local operational matters'; the question of buying additional fire rescue units. So the Policy Division on Resilience calls this a `local operational matter'. Are we getting through to them at all?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 09 November 2005

Okay, if I can just take it in stages. In terms of the progress, and clearly there is time involved, but we are on course to get all 10 relocated by March 2006 as per the plan, I hope.

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 09 November 2005

The related changes in the London Safety Plan around the location of the Command Support Unit and the Driver Training Centre ' are they also'

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 09 November 2005

Moving on indeed to the response times themselves, I think that we have new indicators here, particularly in relation to the second fire engine. Previously we were monitoring this in terms of the percentage of incidents at which attendance times met national standards of fire cover, where London was performing less well than some of the other Metropolitan Authorities. I think we have now got two new indicators and on the second fire engine point, the target is to respond within eight minutes on 75% of occasions. That is the key one, I think I am right in saying, on...