• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

You think we have had a fair deal. So you think getting something like 23% of the national funds in 2003/04, 20% last year, and something just over a quarter this year, in other words, roughly in line with our one-fifth population, is fair.

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

The Greens are quite disappointed in the environment budget. I know you are putting it up by £200,000, but it still only makes it £1.5 million compared with £3 million for The Londoner and £2.2 million for all the media and marketing. We are disappointed with that, but we are also extremely disappointed with how much is going into the planning here in the building because, in fact, it is extremely stretched at the moment. The Greens recently had a report on the number of abuses of the London Plan, for example, on the waterways. I think you need to...

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

With respect, following your comments on bus fares and Tube fares, which my colleague Angie (Bray, AM) has talked about, and indeed your promise to keep the Congestion Charge at £5 for 10 years, perhaps people would not be surprised if you ratted on a promise

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

We thought that we might suggest taking a million or two off it because there is a line in the security connected with G8, and since there is going to be a meeting at Gleneagles we thought the Scots could pay for that rather than the MPS, but we will not be pursuing that later. You talked before about your wish not to have wild swings of the pendulum on Council Tax. The point is made very clearly about the unsustainability. Do you have plans, a `plan B- if you like, as to how to deal with the police budget...

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

You dismiss the concerns that were expressed by TfL's Finance Panel, who should know about these things?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

Recently, TfL's own Finance Panel was critical of the decision to carry on spending money on the West London Tram project, which is unpopular locally and may not go ahead. Is that another example of you wasting money on projects that are not going to happen?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

Moving on to the child fares, earlier you talked about starting the scheme at the end of the summer term rather than the start of this year's autumn term. What is the cost implication of that decision?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

LTUC have expressed concern about that policy because they feel that it may well lead to a loss of more fares than you are gaining and, in effect, it is government for the few rather than the many. Will you not reconsider this expensive scheme?

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

Back in the annals of time. We all know that Step Change and Neighbourhood Policing have been welcomed across London but we are only less than halfway there with it in the capital. What assurances have you received from Government that next year when it is not a general election year Step Change will continue to be funded?

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 26 January 2005

I pushed you hard when you were against the Coulsdon Inner Relief Road and I will push you hard in this session about Purley Cross. I hope that Purley Cross was a marginal decision, that it almost made it, but I must add that I think the people in South London still regard it as being a comment of irony that somehow we were getting the lion's share of investment in South London. I am very grateful for the Coulsdon Inner Relief Road, but that does not solve all our problems. You did not answer the question on why it...