• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 March 2007

You rightly said that you have to estimate the amount of money that you are losing. How do you carry out that calculation to reach that result?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 March 2007

It usually looks like a lot more than that when operations are carried out on the bendy buses in central London.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 March 2007

So if he did come up with that plan, you would not automatically say no, despite having told us that you had ruled it out before?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 21 March 2007

OK. You said to us last time I asked you about bendy buses that you were not going to introduce any more on routes round London. David Brown told us last week that Transport for London had not ruled that option out for the future. What is the actual situation?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

This question tries to make the point that motorbikes are less congesting, but in fact they do congest advance stop lines, and would you agree with me they can be more polluting and also they can create just as many collisions as cars and so they are not necessarily a safe option? I am still your Road Safety Ambassador and your Green Transport Advisor, I do not know if you know that?

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

It is not just the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, it is also the City of Westminster doing the same thing. It is quite clear the Conservative boroughs are not just being anti-bikers, but also capitalising on the Congestion Charging to increase their parking income. I understand, for example, with the new free way through Park Lane, that they have opened up a new source of income on the car parking under Park Lane. I was wondering whether that was something that you were aware of, and does it not show that the Conservative authorities are probably going to...

• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

Sorry, can I stop you there? Can you start from the premise of £2.375 billion, plus the £1.9 billion you have now told us about which we did not know about before, because it was previously £1.044 billion in all the published documents? So the £900 million is the only one I want to concentrate on. Is that regeneration or is that core Olympic costs?

• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

Can I just be clear, Mr Mayor, about these figures? As I understand it you say there is £5.1 billion altogether, which includes, you are now saying, £1.9 billion for regeneration. So it was the £2.375 billion plus the £900 million that Tessa Jowell identified. Are you now saying that that £900 million is to do with core Olympic costs?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

Mr Mayor, allegedly the Chancellor is talking about any other cost overruns being transferred to the Lottery with potentially up to £2 billion being suddenly removed from good causes. Does that not give you cause for concern about money being removed from good causes across London?

• Question by: Damian Hockney
• Meeting date: 21 February 2007

The only thing that concerns me when I look through the Memorandum of Understanding, is that there is no time limit. So, irrespective of what you say, I cannot see anywhere where it says that there is a point at which Londoners may have to stop paying for it. Therefore, whether you are Mayor or not, there has to be a sharing agreement to be agreed, as appropriate, with the Mayor of London and National Lottery funding. What I can see is a situation where the Government can effectively enforce, over a very long period, as in Montreal, Londoners to...