• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

You told the Assembly that it was a misrepresentation. Was it a misrepresentation when it showed that more Londoners were satisfied with you than were dissatisfied with you?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

I disagree with you, the London Councils disagree with you, this poll quite clearly disagrees with you. It is quite likely that, later on this morning, the Assembly, similarly, is going to disagree with the extension of powers because they do not believe that decisions which affect local people and planning decisions [should be taken by the Mayor]. It is all very well for you to say it is a very tiny number of planning decisions with regards to the totality of planning decisions which are taken in London, but the truth of the matter is that the moral suasion...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

So, why is one bit which appears to be against your proposals a misrepresentation, but the one thing that supports you is not a misrepresentation?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

I am sorry. Is it not the truth of the matter, with regard to opinion polls of this kind, if you do not agree with them, you are going to proceed in any event, as we have heard about the West London Tram? Under those circumstances, is it really worth your while or anyone's while in London holding opinion polls at all?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Do you know that is a bit rich, really, coming from you, saying that things are being dealt with for party political reasons. Many people would say that the London Plan and your amendment is driving forward a political agenda; for example, your policy relating to affordable housing. That is a political matter. In the opening statement which you made this morning, you talked about your casual attitude to events being rather more casual than, how shall I put it, more formal parts of Government. The truth of the matter is -

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

I do often go through Earl's Court, simply because I can never get a Circle Line Tube, so I have to go there to get onto a District Line to go down in that part of West London. Should the emphasis not actually be on electronic information and the signs there being replaced as quickly as possible with electronic information, rather than putting it out on a tannoy, which I actually have not heard ever whenever I pass right through Earl's Court?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

see mayor's reply

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Well, you are coming to Earl's Court, but the point I would just like to draw your attention to is that in focusing on Earl's Court, it has come to our attention that there are many other stations, particularly, it would seem, on the District and perhaps the Piccadilly Line, which have been suffering from the same problem. It does seem to go hand in hand with refurbishments. If I could just draw your attention, particularly, to places like Turnham Green, to Chiswick Park, Ealing Common, Putney Bridge, some in Wimbledon. These stations all seem to be suffering the same...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Well, we might need to talk about the health and safety as well.

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Mr Biggs has asked me to ask you to let him have a copy of that written answer.