Speeches by Taylor.
Every Hansard contribution by Alison Taylor this parliament, most recent first. Back to the MP page for the headline figures and analysed positions.
Showing 81–100 of 198 contributions · most-recent first
| Date | Debate & contribution | Words |
|---|---|---|
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Mr Shelton, Network Rail supported phase 2 of the Leeds scheme. From your perspective, what were the key factors that helped justify that contribution? Also, was flood risk primarily seen as an operational issue or part of a broader resilience objective?” | 41 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “That is amazing. Emma, if I can ask you about Yorkshire Water’s contribution, you contributed financially to phase 1. What made it a priority for the company to support it, and how do you assess that kind of investment in terms of protecting assets, long-term resilience and customers?” | 48 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “This next part of the questioning is on the role and impact of partnership funding in flood resilience. Mr Moxon, can you outline what the partnership funding model enabled in the Leeds flood alleviation scheme that would not have been possible through central Government funding alone?” | 46 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Are you able to say what the percentage of central Government funding was?” | 13 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Mr Shelton, are you able to answer the same question? Would you like me to repeat the question?” | 18 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Yes, please.” | 2 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Mr Moxon, looking back, do you feel that the scale of the investment has matched the impact, in terms of avoided flood damage, business continuity and long-term economic resilience for the city and the region?” | 35 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “The next section is about partnership funding, how it works in practice, where it adds value and what the challenges have been in the delivery of that. Mr Moxon, how straightforward is it for local authorities to align priorities, timelines and funding rules across different partners in large flood schemes?” | 50 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Mr Shelton, Network Rail supported phase 2 of the Leeds scheme. From your perspective, what were the key factors that helped justify that contribution? Also, was flood risk primarily seen as an operational issue or part of a broader resilience objective?” | 41 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “That is amazing. Emma, if I can ask you about Yorkshire Water’s contribution, you contributed financially to phase 1. What made it a priority for the company to support it, and how do you assess that kind of investment in terms of protecting assets, long-term resilience and customers?” | 48 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “This next part of the questioning is on the role and impact of partnership funding in flood resilience. Mr Moxon, can you outline what the partnership funding model enabled in the Leeds flood alleviation scheme that would not have been possible through central Government funding alone?” | 46 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Are you able to say what the percentage of central Government funding was?” | 13 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “I appreciate that additional information. Emma, what were the key drivers for your organisation’s involvement in the scheme and how was the case made internally for investing in flood resilience?” | 30 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Mr Shelton, are you able to answer the same question? Would you like me to repeat the question?” | 18 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Yes, please.” | 2 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Mr Moxon, looking back, do you feel that the scale of the investment has matched the impact, in terms of avoided flood damage, business continuity and long-term economic resilience for the city and the region?” | 35 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “The next section is about partnership funding, how it works in practice, where it adds value and what the challenges have been in the delivery of that. Mr Moxon, how straightforward is it for local authorities to align priorities, timelines and funding rules across different partners in large flood schemes?” | 50 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “Mr Shelton, Network Rail supported phase 2 of the Leeds scheme. From your perspective, what were the key factors that helped justify that contribution? Also, was flood risk primarily seen as an operational issue or part of a broader resilience objective?” | 41 |
| 11 Jun 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 550) “That is amazing. Emma, if I can ask you about Yorkshire Water’s contribution, you contributed financially to phase 1. What made it a priority for the company to support it, and how do you assess that kind of investment in terms of protecting assets, long-term resilience and customers?” | 48 |
| 7 May 2025 | Environmental Audit Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 439) “To be clear, as far as the Duchy is concerned there is no actual subsidy being provided and other developers of scale could take the same patient capital approach. In your view, there is no reason why they could not undertake similar projects.” | 43 |