• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

Time is dragging on. One of the key issues here is that it is not the percentage of land, it is what that land that is still under private ownership, is being used for. Quite clearly it is predominantly employment. The issue for us is are we going to see those jobs lost or are you giving a cast iron guarantee that those jobs will be saved?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

It is interesting that we moved from the Kingsway International Christian Centre to the Mosque in that last question, and I congratulate Mr Biggs on getting us that distance. I want to go back to the Christian Centre because the LDA's proposal is that this facility be moved from to Rainham in my constituency. Whilst we welcome newcomers and it is good to see them, I am surprised that the LDA is suggesting that a facility which has 8,000 worshippers be placed in a location where you refused to countenance a casino precisely because you said that public transport to...

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

I am glad to see that you do publicly recognise the need for openness and transparency in decision making. In the search for a model that works, one of the things you might want to look at is the London planning process. Nobody has ever charged the examination in public process, and the procedure which goes on, which is accessible and transparent, with being a problem, and nobody has ever said that the most important planning decision you take, which is the agreement to the London Plan, is not transparent. Do you think there might be anything about the EIP...

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

I think the movement in all of this is very welcome. Can I take us back a few days? You rubbished the London Councils', as I have to call them, - or the ALG as they were - original comments, particularly the poll that they carried out by NOP. I think you gave us some historical comments on that. If NOP is so untrustworthy, why is TfL still using it? Most recently, I understand on attitudes to bendy buses. How do you advise the Assembly to regard TfL's use of NOP and what we should look at, coming from that?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

Finally, how will you reach a decision on which applications you are going to look at, and which ones you will not?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

In terms of these public hearings, are you suggesting a route whereby your officers would make recommendations to you, as the planning authority as it were, for you to then confirm or otherwise those decisions? Is that the way you are envisaging it?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

How do you square the circle on the potential, not necessarily for yourself but a future Mayor, meeting developers and then considering planning applications? So meeting in private developers, and then making decisions on planning applications in public?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

Mr Mayor, how are you going to suggest then that the London Assembly oversees those planning decisions to make sure they are open, transparent and properly accountable?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

We certainly would not be held responsible for those I would hope! Just talking about what happened at the press conference, we have discussed this with Tim O'Toole and he says that you went to the press conference basically unbriefed about this issue which appeared on the front page of The Sun newspaper that morning. If it had been another type of issue, if there had been an incident or if there had been a policy announcement I assume London Underground would have briefed you before the press conference. I would have thought that it was almost a no-brainer that...

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

One of the things that will worry people about the response you have just given is that there seems to be no control over what our contractors and sub-contractors are doing at all. This is the case of a contractor to Metronet so it was some way down the food chain. Should there not be some sort of standard requirement that everyone who works on the underground, whether they are working for a privatised company or for Transport for London, should actually meet before they are allowed to do that? So you have a cross the board standard. We can...