DOCSLIB.ORG

London Assembly

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
London Assembly Appendix 1 Planning Committee 10 June 2014 Transcript Item 7: Tall Building’s and London’s Skyline Nicky Gavron AM (Chair): If we could just start with each of you telling us who you are, it is as much for us as for the webcast as well. Rowan Moore (architecture critic, The Observer): I am Rowan Moore. I am the architecture critic of The Observer and I am one of the people who initiated The Observer and Architects Journal’s Skyline campaign. Tony Pidgley CBE (Chairman, Berkeley Group plc): Tony Pidgley, Chairman of Berkeley Group, the developer responsible for some of the taller buildings in London. Julia Barfield (Managing Director, MBA): Julia Barfield of Marks Barfield Architects. I am responsible for the London Eye among other things and an architect in London. Peter Rees (Professor of Places and City Planning, The Bartlett, UCL): Peter Rees, Professor of Places and City Planning at University College London and former City Planning Officer at the City of London. Sunand Prasad (Architect, Penoyre & Prasad Architects): I am Sunand Prasad. I am an architect. I am also co-founder of the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE), during which time I was involved in looking at tall buildings currently in practice. Sir Edward Lister (Deputy Mayor for Policy and Planning, GLA): Edward Lister. I am the Deputy Mayor responsible for Planning, so the operation of the London Plan and the processing of that come under my area of responsibility. Stewart Murray (Assistant Director – Planning, GLA): Stewart Murray, the Greater London Authority Assistant Director of Planning. Sunand Prasad (Architect, Penoyre & Prasad Architects): Sorry, I should have said that I am also a member of the Mayor’s Design Advisory Group. Nicky Gavron AM (Chair): That is important. Thank you for providing that. I would like to add that Julia [Barfield] is responsible for the wheel, or the London Eye, as you call it. Peter Murray, I would like you to introduce this topic for us and to kick off with a first question, which Steve [O’Connell] is going to ask. But if you would just introduce yourself, Peter, and tell us a little bit about why you are here., Peter Murray (Chairman, New London Architecture): I am Chairman of New London Architecture (NLA) and we are the centre for debate and discussion about issues to do with the built environment in London, with a regular series of debates about issues of concern. We have a large model of central London in our premises in Store Street where we put little models of proposals and buildings that have planning permission. I started to notice over the last year or so that we had more little models going onto the larger model that were taller than one might say had previously been there. We saw these popping up, as you might say, in Nine Elms, the City of London, Canary Wharf, South Quay, Stratford and along the South Bank, so I thought it was worth investigating. We looked into the issue and we came up with some research which showed that there were some 237 towers in the system at the moment; and we thought it was worth doing an exhibition about this, just to show people what was going on. It was clear that many people were not aware of the scale of changes that were happening in London. Clearly, within City Hall, people knew that. Outside we did not, and we thought that it was part of our role as London’s centre for the built environment that we should tell people what was happening. We commissioned models. We commissioned views. We put an exhibition together which gives people a really clear picture of the scale of the issue we face. Our position is that we actually think tall buildings are good, that they are necessary and that well-designed both in terms of the skyline and in terms of how they hit the ground in the right place they are a very good addition to London’s built environment. We would encourage buildings of high quality where we can. In that context we have raised a debate, which is very healthy for London, to ensure that as we meet the huge growth requirement of London over the next few decades, we create a city we can all be proud of. Nicky Gavron AM (Chair): Good. Steve. Steve O’Connell (Deputy Chair): Yes, thank you very much. I am really pleased we are covering this very significant issue and, as an introductory piece, we would like to investigate the drivers of the significant changes you have just referred to; the scale of the change and in essence, as the Chair mentioned earlier, why now as opposed to five, ten or 20 years ago and where, and define what we mean by a tall building. There are definitions but there seems to be some flexing around the definitions and I would like people’s opinions around the definition of what is a tall building. That sets the scene for a debate a little bit later. So, initially I am happy for anyone to come in, but certainly I would look forward to something from Tony, Peter [Rees] and Sir Edward on this one. In those parameters, who would like to pipe up first? Tony Pidgley CBE (Chairman, Berkeley Group plc): I do not think the debate is about tall buildings. It is about numbers and the density that we so desperately need in London. It is a right for everybody to have a home. Equally, though, the public realm and what you make of the place and how you treat the place is important to it. If you look at what we do - and we have been looking at the density and unfortunately I did not get the papers until Friday night, so I do not have as many facts as I would like - but if you take a lot of these big council estates we have pulled down, they are dense. Kidbrooke or Woodbury had 2,000 units and we have now put back 5,000 and have doubled the public open space. We run Market and Opinion Research International (MORI) tests of them and families are wishing to live in them. People do want to live in them. They are good for London. They are good for the economy. I talked to Nicky [Gavron] about it when she asked me to make some points. We bought 1 Blackfriars, which is a very large tower, from the receiver. We talked to the local community and we talked to the local authority about the planning. Nobody wanted to change it. They thought it was architecturally a very pleasing building and I would say to everybody here today ‘architecture’ is always going to be in the eye of the beholder. We gave a cheque upfront when we got planning for £29 million to the London Borough of Southwark. We do not know what they have done to it. We understand it was for the Aylesbury Estate. It creates 200 permanent full-time jobs for London. We invested as Berkeley under the planning £680,000 in training and employment for young people, which has been a great success. The local authority gets a further £3 million in Homes Bonus and the stamp duty on the site is £40 million. If you look at the contribution to society on something like that, £70 million is going into creating other homes. Given that we are the fourth most visited capital city and we are a world-class city, if you take a tower and you build it in isolation and you do not look at its surroundings, it will always be a tower. However you have to look at it in the context of what you are doing with it and how you make the place and how you create homes for people that everybody has a right to have. Nicky Gavron AM (Chair): Tony, you were not building towers, though, in the 1990s, were you? Why now? Steve O’Connell (Deputy Chair): Yes, that was the point. Why now? I accept that you are talking about one of the main drivers. Clearly, on the figures I have, something like 80% of the 236 that have been mentioned are residential. That is your field. That is your area. You are saying that the drivers and the pressures on the boroughs and the Mayor to provide residential or affordable residential in other ways is the key point. However, the Chair has just mentioned that ten years ago the same drivers were there. Kit Malthouse AM: A lot of these sites, though, presumably, you bought quite a long time ago and some of them will have been part of the land bank and now you are building towers just in the last few years. Tony Pidgley CBE (Chairman, Berkeley Group plc): No, it is not as straightforward as that, sorry. 25 years ago when we first came into London, London was not a residential capital then. It was not one of the greatest growing capitals of the world. It has become that over the last 25 years, so there has been a major shift in demand. We should be proud and celebrate the success of London, the jobs it creates and what it is doing at the end of the day. Nicky, we were building towers because the St George Wharf Tower that a lot of people have criticised was approved by you and Ken [Livingstone, former Mayor of London].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • City Villages: More Homes, Better Communities, IPPR
    CITY VILLAGES MORE HOMES, BETTER COMMUNITIES March 2015 © IPPR 2015 Edited by Andrew Adonis and Bill Davies Institute for Public Policy Research ABOUT IPPR IPPR, the Institute for Public Policy Research, is the UK’s leading progressive thinktank. We are an independent charitable organisation with more than 40 staff members, paid interns and visiting fellows. Our main office is in London, with IPPR North, IPPR’s dedicated thinktank for the North of England, operating out of offices in Newcastle and Manchester. The purpose of our work is to conduct and publish the results of research into and promote public education in the economic, social and political sciences, and in science and technology, including the effect of moral, social, political and scientific factors on public policy and on the living standards of all sections of the community. IPPR 4th Floor 14 Buckingham Street London WC2N 6DF T: +44 (0)20 7470 6100 E: [email protected] www.ippr.org Registered charity no. 800065 This book was first published in March 2015. © 2015 The contents and opinions expressed in this collection are those of the authors only. CITY VILLAGES More homes, better communities Edited by Andrew Adonis and Bill Davies March 2015 ABOUT THE EDITORS Andrew Adonis is chair of trustees of IPPR and a former Labour cabinet minister. Bill Davies is a research fellow at IPPR North. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The editors would like to thank Peabody for generously supporting the project, with particular thanks to Stephen Howlett, who is also a contributor. The editors would also like to thank the Oak Foundation for their generous and long-standing support for IPPR’s programme of housing work.
    [Show full text]
  • London Plan 2004
    Other formats and languages For a large print, Braille, disc, sign language video or audio-tape version of this document or its summary, please contact us at the address below: Public Liaison Unit Greater London Authority Telephone 020 7983 4100 City Hall www.london.gov.uk The Queen’s Walk London SE1 2AA You will need to supply your name, your postal address and state the format and title of the publication you require. The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London If you would like a copy of the summary of this document in your language, please phone the number or contact us at the Plan The London address above. Chinese Hindi Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London Greater for Spatial Development Strategy Vietnamese Bengali Greek Urdu Turkish Arabic Punjabi Gujarati February 2004 City Hall www.london.gov.uk The Queen’s Walk Enquiries 020 7983 4100 London SE1 2AA Minicom 020 7983 4458 MoL/Feb 04/CJ D&P/MT/448A The London Plan Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London February 2004 copyright Greater London Authority February 2004 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk London SE1 2AA www.london.gov.uk enquiries 020 7983 4100 minicom 020 7983 4458 ISBN 1 85261 544 3 Cover photograph Adam Hinton This document is printed on 50 per cent post consumer recycled paper, 50 per cent totally chlorine free pulp, and printed with vegetable oil based inks. Acknowlegements The Mayor would like to thank everyone who contributed to this plan including the Independent Panel, all participants at the Examination in Public and everyone else who responded to the public consultation.
    [Show full text]
  • New-Build `Gentrification' and London's Riverside Renaissance
    Environment and Planning A 2005, volume 37, pages 1165 ^ 1190 DOI:10.1068/a3739 New-build `gentrification' and London's riverside renaissance Mark Davidson, Loretta Lees Department of Geography, King's College London, Strand, London WC2R 2LS, England; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Received 3 February 2004; in revised form 5 August 2004 Abstract. In a recent conference paper Lambert and Boddy (2002) questioned whether new-build residential developments in UK city centres were examples of gentrification. They concluded that this stretched the term too far and coined `residentialisation' as an alternative term. In contrast, we argue in this paper that new-build residential developments in city centres are examples of gentrification. We argue that new-build gentrification is part and parcel of the maturation and mutation of the gentrification process during the post-recession era. We outline the conceptual cases for and against new-build `gentrification', then, using the case of London's riverside renaissance, we find in favour of the case for. ``In the last decade the designer apartment blocks built by corporate developers for elite consumption have become as characteristic of gentrified landscapes as streetscapes of lovingly restored Victorian terraces. As gentrification continues to progress and exhibit new forms and patterns, it seems unnecessary to confine the concept to residential rehabilitation.'' Shaw (2002, page 44) 1 Introduction Recent gentrification research has begun to highlight the challenges that current waves of gentrification pose towards its conceptualisation (Lees, 2003a; Slater, 2004). In the last decade gentrification has matured and its processes are operating in a new economic, cultural, social, and political environment.
    [Show full text]
  • 2001 GA Ann Report.A/W
    Printed by Seacourt Press Limited on recycled paper made from 75% de-inked post consumer waste and a maximum of 25% mill broke. Seacourt have EMAS and ISO14001 accreditation, are members of the waterless printing association and their carbon emissions are offset. EMAS registration number UK-5-0000073. annual report 2000/01 our mission Green Alliance exists to promote sustainable development by ensuring that the environment is at the heart of decision-making We work with senior people in government, parliament, business and the environment movement to encourage new ideas, dialogue and constructive solutions. Green Alliance has three main aims: > to make the environment a central political issue > to integrate the environment effectively in public policy and decision-making > to stimulate new thinking and advance the environmental agenda into new areas The publication of this report has been supported by Severn Trent plc and the DEFRA Environmental Action Fund chair’s report Green Alliance’s increased strategic focus over the past two years is paying dividends. Our efforts to engage the Prime Minister and his officials on the environment succeeded, with Tony Blair’s speech to a Green Alliance/CBI audience in October 2000. This was by no means the end of a process, but opened a new dialogue between the Prime Minister and environment groups. Another success was the publication of our detailed, consensual work on the role of negotiated agreements between government and business. This charts a course through opposing views, laying down a model of best practice of which government, business and NGOs can feel ownership. Two Green Alliance pamphlets received considerable attention.
    [Show full text]
  • London Assembly (Mayor’S Question Time) – 21 October 2015
    Appendix 1 London Assembly (Mayor’s Question Time) – 21 October 2015 Transcript of Agenda Item 4 – Oral Update on the Report of the Mayor Jennette Arnold OBE AM (Chair): Mayor, do you need five minutes to update us on any matters? Boris Johnson MP (Mayor of London): I do not know how long I need, but I will give you a quick report, Jennette. Just to remind the Assembly, we have had a record number of affordable homes but also in the last few weeks I was able to announce that 52,000 Londoners on modest incomes have moved into part-buy/part-rent homes. These are incredibly important because so many Londoners want to get a share in the value of their home. I went to see a fantastic project up at Waltham Forest at Gallery Court in Fulbourne Road where there are about 124 mixed-tenure apartments. The average starting outlay is about £63,750. We have deposits for as little as £5,000, averaging £13,000 for the deposit for the purchase. Average household wages for these homes are about £37,000. If you can imagine two people with a collective income of £37,000, it is really within Londoners’ reach. That was a wonderful project to see. We have launched a report on the dynamism of London’s creative industries, which are now worth almost £35 billion to the economy. That seems to have more than doubled. The last figure I used to use was £16 billion and so it seems to have gone up massively.
    [Show full text]
  • DVS Phase 1 Consultation Report
    Direct Vision Standards Consultation results November 2017 Contents 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 2 Methodology for analysis of consultation responses ......................................... 2 3 Analysis of responses to closed question ......................................................... 3 4 Analysis of responses to open question ......................................................... 19 5 Responses from stakeholders ........................................................................ 50 Appendix A – List of stakeholders consulted……………………………………………65 Appendix B - Stakeholder email..………………………………………………………...72 1 1 Introduction Between 24 January and 18 April 2017, we consulted on proposals to introduce a Direct Vision Standard for HGVs in London. This forms part of the Mayor’s commitment to reduce road danger through the adoption of a ‘Vision Zero’ approach. This document summarises the results to the consultation. About the proposals Much progress has been made through working in partnership with the freight industry to improve HGV safety, including HGV design, but we need to go further. Evidence shows that HGV drivers react more quickly using direct vision where they can see more of their surroundings directly through their windows, as opposed to indirectly through mirrors or monitors. This has the potential to reduce the risk of fatal or serious collisions. The proposals included introducing a new simple Direct Vision Standard which would rate vehicles from zero (poor) to five star (excellent) based on how much a HGV driver can see directly from a vehicle cab, rather than through other equipment such as mirrors. The aim of which is to give regulators, manufacturers, operators and contractors an objective standard by which to rate and improve the safety of HGVs. The proposals also included using this standard to ban or restrict HGVs with the most limited direct vision from London’s roads.
    [Show full text]
  • MPA Members Attendance Record 2007/08
    APPENDIX 1 MPA member attendance record 2007/08 Figures in brackets are the number of committee meetings held during the year; figures not in brackets are the numbers actually attended by that member. Anthony Arbour Full Authority: (9) - 9 Remuneration: (3) - 2 PPR*: (7) – 2 PSC: (6) – 2 Total: (25) - 15 Jennette Arnold Full Authority: (9) - 8 CoP: (6) - 3 Corp. Governance: (3) - 1 Remuneration: (3) - 1 Total: (22) – 13 Reshard Auladin Full Authority (9) - 8 CoP: (6) - 5 Finance*: (9) - 6 Remuneration: (3) - 2 PPR*: (7) - 6 PSC: (6) - 5 Total: (40) - 32 Richard Barnes Full Authority (9) - 8 CoP: (6) - 3 Finance*: (9) - 2 PPR*: (7) - 1 (resigned from ctee Sept. 07) Total: (31) - 14 Faith Boardman Full Authority: (9) - 7 CoP (6) - 6 Corp. Governance (3) - 3 Finance* (9) - 1 PPR* (7) - 1 Total: (34) - 18 Cindy Butts Full Authority: (9) - 9 CoP (6) - 6 EODB (4) - 3 Remuneration (3) - 2 Total: (22) - 19 Dee Doocey Full Authority (9) - 6 Finance*: (9) - 5 Total: (18) - 11 Len Duvall Full Authority (9) - 8 CoP: (6) - 5 Remuneration: (3) - 2 Total: (18) - 15 Nicky Gavron Full Authority (9) - 6 Total: (9) - 6 Toby Harris Full Authority (9) - 7 CoP: (6) - 5 Corp. Governance: (3) - 3 Total: (18) - 15 Kirsten Hearn Full Authority: (9) - 7 CoP: (6) - 4 EODB: (4) - 4 Total: (19) - 15 Peter Herbert Full Authority (9) - 9 EODB: (4) - 1 Total (13) - 10 Damian Hockney Full Authority: (9) - 4 (Resigned as Member CoP: (6) - 1 March 2008) EODB: (4) - 1 PSC: (6) - 2 Standards: (1) – 0 Finance*: (9) - 0 Total: (35) - 8 Elizabeth Howlett Full Authority: (9) - 8 CoP: (6) - 6 Finance*: (9) - 8 PSC: (6) - 3 Total: (33) - 24 Jenny Jones Full Authority (9) - 8 PSC: (6) - 2 Total: (15) - 10 Joanne McCartney Full Authority: (9) - 7 Total: (9) - 7 Karim Murji Full Authority: (9) - 8 CoP: (6) - 5 PPR*: (7) - 7 PSC: (6) - 6 Corp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mayor Is Elected by the People of London Every
    14523 GLA Mayor lflt AW 10/9/02 3:42 PM Page 1 The Mayor is elected by the people of London The Mayor’s vision every four years. The next election will be in Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, wants 2004. The current Mayor is Ken Livingstone, who London to be: was elected in May 2000. • A prosperous city, in which all share in The Mayor represents London and Londoners, in the benefits of wealth created in London’s the UK and internationally. He takes a strategic dynamic economy. look at what is happening in London, drawing • A city for people, with safe, attractive streets, up policies for the social and economic where goods and services are within easy reach development of the city. and where everyone feels safe and secure. The Mayor’s powers and responsibilities are set • An accessible city, with fast, efficient and out in the Greater London Authority Act 1999. comfortable means of transport and access to This Act also covers the London Assembly and affordable homes, education and training, the Greater London Authority (GLA). health, leisure and recreation. • A fair city, showing tolerance and abolishing all forms of discrimination, where neighbourhoods and communities have a say in their future. • A green city, making efficient use of natural resources and energy, respecting the natural world and wildlife, using to the full the varied pattern of open space, eco-friendly design and construction methods, recycling waste and creating new ‘green’ industries. The job of the Mayor The Mayor sets the budget for the Metropolitan The Deputy Mayor Police Service (under the oversight of the The Mayor appoints one of the London Assembly Metropolitan Police Authority), Transport for members to be Deputy Mayor.
    [Show full text]
  • Minutes Before Starting These Questions, Has Any Relevance to the Value, Function Or Effectiveness of London Power
    Appendix 2 London Assembly Environment Committee - Wednesday 24 February 2021 Transcript of Agenda Item 5 – London’s Green Recovery from COVID-19 – Greater London Authority (GLA) and London Councils Caroline Russell AM (Chair): [Mayor] Philip [Granville] is joining us on the next panel and I will also welcome Shirley Rodrigues, who is Deputy Mayor for Environment [and Energy] at the GLA; Elliot Treharne, who is Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy at the GLA; Peter Daw, who is Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy at the GLA; and once again Mayor Philip Glanville, who is Chair of the Transport and Environment Committee for London Councils. I am now going to invite Shirley to give a brief opening statement and then we will move on to Nicky Gavron [AM], who will be asking the first lot of questions. Shirley Rodrigues (Deputy Mayor for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): First of all, I want to say thank you for the invitation and thanks to the Committee for your excellent work over this last term. At the risk of déjà vu, thanks to Assembly Members Nicky Gavron, Jennette Arnold and Tony Arbour, who are stepping down at this election after a rather unexpected and unwanted extension to their term. In terms of what we are going to be talking about today, as you know, the Mayor’s ambition is for London to be the greenest of all cities and we have set some very tough targets to meet: zero waste, zero carbon, the best air quality of any major world city, and thriving and green and biodiverse spaces.
    [Show full text]
  • Mayor's Office
    Mayor’s Office City Hall The Queen’s Walk More London London SE1 2AA Switchboard: 020 7983 4000 Minicom: 020 7983 4458 David Scourfield Web: www.london.gov.uk Our ref: 1573b/02 Development Management Your ref: 2011/0898 Waltham Forest Council Date: 30 October 2012 Sycamore House Town Hall Complex Forest Road Walthamstow LONDON E17 4JG Dear Mr Scourfield, Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended); Greater London Authority Acts 1999 and 2007; Town & Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 The former Walthamstow Greyhound Stadium site I refer to your letter of 18 October 2012 informing me that Waltham Forest Council is minded to grant planning permission for the above planning application. I refer you also to the notice that was issued on 24 October 2012 under the provisions of article 5(1)(b)(i) of the above Order. Having now considered a report on this case I am content to allow Waltham Forest Council to determine the case itself, subject to any action that the Secretary of State may take, and do not therefore wish to direct refusal or to take over the application for my own determination. I share the sadness of many about the demise of dog racing from this historic corner of London. However, I believe this proposal will provide a major boost for Walthamstow, creating new jobs and new homes, many of which will be affordable and attract desperately needed new investment into the area. Whilst no viable plan has been put forward to bring racing back I am pleased the new development will preserve many of the historic elements of the stadium including a sprint circuit along the route of the old track.
    [Show full text]
  • London's Political
    CONSTITUENCY MP (PARTY) MAJORITY Barking Margaret Hodge (Lab) 15,272 Battersea Jane Ellison (Con) 7,938 LONDON’S Beckenham Bob Stewart (Con) 18,471 Bermondsey & Old Southwark Neil Coyle (Lab) 4,489 Bethnal Green & Bow Rushanara Ali (Lab) 24,317 Bexleyheath & Crayford David Evennett (Con) 9,192 POLITICAL Brent Central Dawn Butler (Lab) 19,649 Brent North Barry Gardiner (Lab) 10,834 Brentford & Isleworth Ruth Cadbury (Lab) 465 Bromley & Chislehurst Bob Neill (Con) 13,564 MAP Camberwell & Peckham Harriet Harman (Lab) 25,824 Carshalton & Wallington Tom Brake (LD) 1,510 Chelsea & Fulham Greg Hands (Con) 16,022 This map shows the political control Chingford & Woodford Green Iain Duncan Smith (Con) 8,386 of the capital’s 73 parliamentary Chipping Barnet Theresa Villiers (Con) 7,656 constituencies following the 2015 Cities of London & Westminster Mark Field (Con) 9,671 General Election. On the other side is Croydon Central Gavin Barwell (Con) 165 Croydon North Steve Reed (Lab [Co-op]) 21,364 a map of the 33 London boroughs and Croydon South Chris Philp (Con) 17,410 details of the Mayor of London and Dagenham & Rainham Jon Cruddas (Lab) 4,980 London Assembly Members. Dulwich & West Norwood Helen Hayes (Lab) 16,122 Ealing Central & Acton Rupa Huq (Lab) 274 Ealing North Stephen Pound (Lab) 12,326 Ealing, Southall Virendra Sharma (Lab) 18,760 East Ham Stephen Timms (Lab) 34,252 Edmonton Kate Osamor (Lab [Co-op]) 15,419 Eltham Clive Efford (Lab) 2,693 Enfield North Joan Ryan (Lab) 1,086 Enfield, Southgate David Burrowes (Con) 4,753 Erith & Thamesmead
    [Show full text]
  • Easy Read Guide
    How the London Assembly works for you Easy Read Guide LONDONASSEMBLY Contents What is the London Assembly? 3 A map of London Assembly Members 5 Who are the Members of the London Assembly? 6 What does the London Assembly do? 13 Can I watch meetings of the London Assembly? 14 What does the London Assembly not deal with? 15 What is the London Youth Assembly? 17 The Mayor of London 18 Key Word Glossary 19 How to get in touch with your local London Assembly Member 20 London Assembly Easy Read | Page 2 What is the London Assembly? The London Assembly meets at City Hall in London. Members of the London Assembly are elected. This means people in London get to decide which Assembly Members they would like to: • hold the Mayor of London to account • work to make London better • explore a range of issues important to Londoners • make decisions for Londoners and London. Assembly Members can ask questions of the Mayor of London at Mayor’s Question Time. The Assembly Members also take part in other meetings to talk about topics important to London and Londoners. London Assembly Easy Read | Page 3 There are 14 Assembly Members that represent different areas across London. There are also 11 other Assembly Members. They represent the whole of London. The Assembly Members are elected by you and other Londoners every four years. The next election is Thursday 6 May 2021. Register to vote by Tuesday 19 April 2021. Instructions on how to register to vote can be found at Londonelects.org.uk or you can send an email to [email protected].
    [Show full text]