• Question by: Len Duvall OBE
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

I tell you what is missing from this debate - and you keep hectoring us about it - is value for money; value for money and all those issues. Where is the value for money concept in this proposal, that you keep hectoring us about, that we have to have? Where is that applied, in terms of TfL, on this project?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

Mr Mayor, some of us will recall your predecessor sitting where you are now and telling us that he was going to use the police to ensure people queued for the buses in London. An approach which was universally welcomed by the Labour Group at the time so, possibly, it has changed its tune since then. Meanwhile, in Redbridge, we are very keen to see the number 25, a bendy bus route which is plagued by high levels of crime and fare evasion --

• Question by: Caroline Pidgeon
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

Given that TfL is paying for the design of the new bus, have you ensured that London will be able to profit from any future sales of it outside London?

• Question by: Richard Tracey
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

Mr Mayor, I wonder whether the other side understand anything about research and development costs for various things that are being developed. Would it be fair, do you reckon, to say that, when the first 100 Olympic tickets have been sold, that each one of them has cost £90 million?

• Question by: James Cleverly
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

Mr Mayor, do you share my confusion at the amazing hypocrisy of the Labour Group? You were criticised earlier on for not doing enough to improve air quality and yet they criticise a bus that will be greener than the current fleet. You are criticised by the Labour Group here for spending money on a new and exciting project, yet we hear in the news that civil servants had to demand written instructions to go through with the inappropriate spending that was going on by Labour ministers at central government. On the one hand we hear from the Labour Group...

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

Mr Mayor, success has many fathers and there are more people claiming success for leading the campaign against the third runway and the sixth terminal than there ever were marching the streets. None are more opportunistic than John McDonnell [Member of Parliament] from Hayes and Harlington. Mr Mayor, the true people who deserve congratulations are those who live in the villages of Sipson, Harlington, Longford and Harmondsworth, who have fought for years to protect the place where they live --

• Question by: Len Duvall OBE
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

We have got a problem here haven't we? You have got one of your strategies saying we need extra air transport capacity for south east London. The Government has come out and said no to Stansted, no to Gatwick and no to Heathrow. I just want to go back to the issue of your powers. You really did fail to intervene on City Airport, didn't you? Was that a mistake or was that a deliberate issue; that you chose to allow a local authority to take a strategic decision that should have been taken in this building?

• Question by: Andrew Boff
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

Bearing in mind the subject that Darren Johnson has raised, have you had a chance to review your decision not to oppose the increased flights at City Airport?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

I just want to take us back to the air quality aspects of this question. A quick observation: one of the other fruits of the coalition is an agreement to switch taxation from per passenger to per plane, which should have a modest effect on encouraging full planes and reducing the total numbers. I have two quick points on air quality. I have a question later on the central London area and we will come back to that. This is just about Heathrow. There are health aspects of these nitrogen dioxide exceedances in Heathrow. When are you going to publish...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 19 May 2010

): It is obviously good news that the third runway is not now going to get the go-ahead, but the figures show that even with the existing arrangements, without the third runway, capacity is predicted to rise to 80 million passengers per annum from 63 million passengers per annum. That is going to put more restrain on air pollution, as your Air Quality Strategy makes clear. Are you opposing any increase in capacity at Heathrow?