• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

I do not want to go into that, but there is a clear issue here, because it was the interference from your office that prevented that scheme from proceeding and of course is now on ice.

• Question by: Joanne McCartney
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

2012 offers not just an opportunity to increase targets for sports participation but also there is the knock-on effect on the health of Londoners as well. At the Health and Public Services Committee yesterday we had evidence from Dr Sheila Adam (Executive Director, Public Health, North East London Strategic Health Authority) about the 2012 Health Board and the work they are trying to do.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

Absolutely. The core GLA's Environment Monitoring Process already commits you to put in place procedures for monitoring timber procurement policies. Why was there a failure and what are you going to do to improve the monitoring so that this does not happen again?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

Well that is useful, we will take you up on that. Are you aware of other occasions where non-FSC certified timber has been used?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

You have rightly received plaudits from Greenpeace over your stance on nuclear power and green energy and I am sure you will from Greenpeace over your stance on polluting vehicles and the Congestion Charge as well. It must be really embarrassing that it took a Greenpeace investigation before you realised that illegal rainforest timber was being used in Trafalgar Square for the hoardings.

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

That is very interesting, thank you. The thought occurs that government is happy to use London as a test zone, whether it is for Congestion Charging, low emission zones or indeed borrowing powers, and that we ought to be lobbying to extend that. Can you just tell me in the very limited time that I have left, what particularly you will be pressing on to Sir Michael, in terms of the Lyons Inquiry, what are your priorities for innovative funding mechanisms?

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

You are currently missing it by 35.5%, that is actually 380,000 crimes - a dramatic figure - so there is no way, sadly, but there is no way that a few more PCSOs, the very welcome full roll out of Safer Neighbourhood Teams, in less than two years is going to get anywhere near the 50% target. We talk always understandably about police and policing, and of course they have a major role in crime reduction, but they are by no means the only agency that works on crime reduction. When thinking about your strategy for the second part of...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

I am very happy to congratulate you again on achieving the Safer Neighbourhoods Target - you know we support that at least as strongly as you do - but actually if you are going to achieve your target of a 50% reduction by the end of your second term, you are going to have to accelerate the reduction in crime by six-fold. Do you know that you are little over half way through; do you really think that this is still a realistic target?

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

I cannot think of anyone that would do that, we all would share your aspiration. You demonstrated to us earlier this morning, I think about carbon emissions, that when you are falling short on the targets set you rethink the strategy. However we define the figures you are falling short on a very desirable target and aspiration. For the second half of your term are you going to rethink the strategy and the priorities? Safer Neighbourhood Teams are excellent, we all support those; we have yet fully to see the results from those, but it is not going to be...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 12 July 2006

I entirely accept it is going in the right direction, I think that is very welcome, but actually as recent as last September, you said simply `yes' to my question then about whether you stood by your claim to cut crime by 50% in your second term. My concern, and I would have thought that it would be your concern too, is that by having what, frankly, I think was always an unrealistic claim, you are in danger of turning a success story into a perception of a failure. Why do you want to do that?