• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

The question in my mind is that while Dee Doocey is, I think, somewhat premature in accusing you of betrayal before a single brick of an Olympic facility has actually been laid, would you agree with me that this is an important subject? I spent a bit of time in Barcelona the other week looking at their Olympic legacy work and the way in which they have integrated disabled sports into the Olympic legacy. The way in which the Olympic Institute, which is going to be part of the legacy of the Olympics, is built is pretty critical. Would you...

• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

That is not in doubt. It is the £45 million I want you to concentrate on, please.

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

Is the real point not what we actually heard from Mr Higgins, who I may say gave an excellent response to our questions; I think we were all very impressed with him the other day when he came. It was not that he is going to be held to the £2.3-odd billion. I think Ms Doocey slightly misread him. What he said was that figure was now historic, and that actually he would not be prepared to put a figure on what he might be prepared to spend on the Olympics, and indeed was still at the stage of working...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

I think the point is, Mr Mayor, that we were told that this bid document was robust and absolutely to be trusted. Now it appears that the bid document has been consigned to the dustbin and we are starting all over again, including on funding for the Paralympics. In other words, we are back in the dark again.

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

That is to the train operating companies, not me? I thought perhaps you were addressing me in your usual way.

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

One of the reasons we did not vote for your budget was because you were not providing sufficient BTP Officers on overground rail, and I hoped you would be saying now that you had more time to study our proposals for an additional 272, and that next year you would be seeking in your budget proposals to further fund BTP Officers, assuming it is still BTP, on overground rail.

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

Your budget and your statements at the time very specifically said 89 for overground rail. In fact, of those, 29 are not missing; they are now deployed on London Underground. Whilst additional officers on London Underground are always welcome, the specific commitment that you gav, and that we supported ' indeed we pressed for you to go for 272 ' was for overground rail. You seem therefore to be one-third short in meeting your budget commitment.

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

I think I can save you the search.

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

I think we all understand that, Mr Mayor. What I am pressing at is to continue the commitment that exists already.

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 21 June 2006

I am very pleased that the Liberals came to the view that they would support extra BTP Officers in the last budget round, albeit a very modest proposal at 286 extra officers. Stay in mind that the Conservatives have always been proposing 600 for a number of years. I would like to ask that, in giving consideration to the budget next year, you look at the extra fare income that is coming in that is beyond that which is projected as a means of funding extra British Transport Police Officers, especially south of the river.