• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 23 February 2005

Mr Mayor, I have to ask you as the Chair to clarify that. I am sure you did not mean to insult the boards of the MPA or LFEPA. One thinks of the borough representatives on LFEPA, the independent and magistrate representatives on the MPA. I am sure you want to clarify that?

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 23 February 2005

Mr Mayor, I have to ask you as the Chair to clarify that. I am sure you did not mean to insult the boards of the MPA or LFEPA. One thinks of the borough representatives on LFEPA, the independent and magistrate representatives on the MPA. I am sure you want to clarify that?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 23 February 2005

It becomes more confusing though, does it not? Using TfL's own figures on projected forwards, they themselves say that there is going to be a quite significant drop in your penalty revenue as a result of some of the changes you are making to the way the Congestion Charge is paid. Added to the added deterrent effect of the £8 charge, it does look as though there is going to be virtually no extra revenue whatsoever. What revenue could he possibly have been referring to when he talked about using it for the setting-up costs of the western extension?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 23 February 2005

What are Mr Kiley's concerns about the scheme as expressed to you?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 23 February 2005

You prefer a dictatorship, do you Mr Mayor?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 23 February 2005

Could you tell Mr Kiley that?

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 23 February 2005

I am most impressed by your haughty dismissal of the values of democracy. Is that haughtiness not also shown in the performance of TfL itself? Its reputation with the residents of London and indeed its reputation with Assembly Members is that TfL could not really care less what other people think? Is that not the effect of having a Chief Executive who is accountable to no one, you having agreed ' rather weakly, apparently, in your negotiation with him ' that he should be the man in charge with no accountability at all? This is contrary to all good practice...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 07 December 2005

I am very grateful for your answer, which I will take not only as an answer but also as a very clear statement of the challenges of getting this right. In the interests of getting to other questions on the agenda, I think we could rest it there, with the promise from you that in the New Year, there will be some clarity about how we are taking this forward, which we can maybe examine again.

• Question by: Damian Hockney
• Meeting date: 07 December 2005

Dee (Doocey, AM) earlier mentioned the fact that at Atlanta 40% of the contracts went to SMEs but part of the reason for that is they do not have the EU Public Procurement Directives. The Forum of Private Business (FPB) and the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) among others have all said that the EU Public Procurement Directives are one of the biggest barriers to entry by SMEs to such events as Olympics. Could you just confirm ' also while I agree with John Biggs (AM) about not leading them up the garden path, the trouble is to a degree...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 07 December 2005

Very briefly, hopefully, then. I am wondering if you can help on this. There are many local firms in my constituency and in Jennette's (Arnold, AM) who are tantalised by the prospect of getting contract work out of the Olympics, and we need to be very straight and open and honest with them about what can be achieved and what cannot be achieved. I am interested in hearing about the extent to which you have taken legal advice on how we can work within the restraints of public law and European law and also about the communication strategy of building...