• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

What about the work which was done on the Waterloo and City Line which was a Metronet major project and still suffers from signal failures? Will London Underground need to go back and look at that?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

One of my constituents raised this with you at the People's Question Time, which we both remember fondly, at Ilford. You said to her at the time, 'I will come back to you with specific details of the signalling system on the Waterloo and City Line' and you have not yet. Will you undertake to do that and let the Assembly Transport Committee have a copy as well?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

With respect, that is a different answer to the one you gave on the night at Ilford. I appreciate it might be difficult to recollect what happened there with so much time since the meeting took place.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

There has been some criticism of the quality of work carried out by Metronet. Can you tell us if there is any work which you are going to have to go back over and redo?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

That is very encouraging in terms of a way forward. I would have thought with the ridiculous way this contract was arranged and the fact that the Liberal Democrats were among the many voices opposing the PPP in the first place ' and indeed ran as Liberal Democrats against Tube privatisation when they first stood for the Assembly ' that they would be welcoming the opportunities of the collapse of the Metronet contract.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

We heard from Tim O'Toole last week that money was being paid out to contractors for work which TfL is not convinced was ever actually carried out. I am sure you are going to be as keen as me to ensure that TfL tracks down all this contracted work and payments and puts that money in the public domain. Will you pledge to name and shame any companies who received money from Metronet for work that was not completed or was not carried out?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

That work did not happen. Do you agree now that presenting the evidence ' and I hope you do present it to the Fraud Squad if there is clear evidence of fraud ' would convince the Government that it would be a bad idea to re-let the PPP contracts to another consortium and that maintaining it in-house is the best possible option?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

There have also been reports of the loss of heritage items from London Underground during Metronet's contract.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 20 February 2008

Signs, tiles; various things which have disappeared from stations when work has been done to upgrade stations. An example is the seats at Elm Park Station which I believe had been moved up the line to Upminster Bridge and put there. There are other items which have disappeared altogether. Is this going to be a priority for London Underground?

• Question by: Gareth Bacon MP
• Meeting date: 08 October 2008

I have a couple of questions really, mostly around sporting legacy. It is something that I am very interested in. The first one concerns one of the venues and the second one is about the Stadium itself. It touches on some of the answers that you gave earlier. The first one is about the equestrian events in Greenwich Park. I was quite gratified by your response to Mr Biggs' question about possible cash savings. I know that KPMG is doing a review on that. The issue I think that I personally have with Greenwich Park is that it will cost...