• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

If someone takes over from you at the next election, would you be happy for your opponents to have the same types of meetings in private to be able to override procurement procedures and so on? Or do you feel that if it was one of your opponents instead you would actually prefer to see some far more rigorous controls, more rigorous public accountability and much better openness?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

Well why not go back to the bad old days where every local authority in the country held their planning meetings in private without any public scrutiny and public access, if that is the best way of making planning decisions? Why should not every planning decision on every authority be in private?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

But you have made it quite clear in your submission on the White Paper that it was not related to being an MP. I will read the full quote again: `If I am lucky enough to be elected as London's first Mayor, and bearing in mind that I have already served five years as Leader of the GLC, I would not seek to serve more than one term." If you do not do what you say, and it is a question of trust as you have just said, can Londoners trust their Mayor?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

Can I just take you back to the word you used which was `crowding'. The current LUL management refuses to actually accept that there is such a thing as overcrowding on the Tube. Although I think most us Londoners here who get wedged against other people's armpits every morning would probably disagree with them. First of all, do you as Mayor accept that there is such a thing as overcrowding on the Tube?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

I must say I did have some difficulty accepting the conclusion to Tube scrutiny that suggested you should set targets for crowding on the Underground, because I am not sure that could be achieved other than by banning people: only men one day of the week and whatever. Of course, there is an economic way of reducing crowding on the Tube through fares policy. I know it is a very difficult question for any Mayor, but is it not the case that were you to try to reduce Underground fares it would produce unacceptable levels of overcrowding on the Tube...

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

Well just take it from me that it is a good measurement.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

I am really glad you say you are going to be upfront and honest. If the Tube established a standard of four people per square metre, which is the same as the Paris Metro, do you think that is something you will be aiming for, whether it is provided by Crossrail taking surplus or whatever? Do you think that is a good benchmark?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

There were nine in mine.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

This goes to a very interesting point. If you take overcrowding per se, one of the things that London Underground do, to justify not calling it overcrowding, is to measure overcrowding from both ends of the line and from first train in the morning to the last train at night. So they argue that there is no such thing as overcrowding. But if you average it out over the day you do not get the bit which you and I are talking about which is in the middle of the middle of the line in the morning. Do you agree...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 18 June 2003

So for now we will have to assume that £330,000 is still pencilled in against this programme of events running up through polling day no doubt. What went wrong with the tendering exercise? Whose fault was it that the grand plans you had before have come to nothing?