• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

It was not as much as you asked for, and you said this to the Budget Committee on 12 June 2003: 'This funding gap is based on what we consider essential to continued expansion of the bus network improvements.' You have not got what you considered to be essential. What programmes are going to be cut to meet the funding gap?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

Let us return to your emergency crisis budget meeting next Wednesday. You are saying it is for you and TfL to decide how to spend the lovely money. You could still look at it as a crisis if it is about actually listing what is going to be cut. Will we know at the end of that meeting what is in, what is out, what is hot, and what is not? Is that the point at which we are going to know what is going from the budget?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

Yesterday Mr Mayor, you told the Association of London Government (ALG) Leaders' Committee that next year they would have to pay an additional 8% in funding the Freedom Pass, and the following the year they would have to pay a further 8% to do that. Will that not be placing an additional burden on the boroughs to help fill TfL's black hole rather than actually helping users of the Freedom Pass?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

The boroughs' concern is not that the Freedom Pass will be lost. We in fact agree with you that that really was something positive that you actually introduced, but we think that the price should be the right price, the fair price, and it should only be used for that purpose. You will be able to use the additional income achieved from this to spend on other TfL projects. Will you ring?fence the income from the cost of the Freedom Pass, which the boroughs will have to collect, to ensure that it is only spent on that purpose and is...

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

I do not wish to use my colleague's time, but we will have a list of your priorities soon.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

This is your Government's Spending Review. It is nothing to do with privatisation. It is your Government's Spending Review that has given you the shortfall.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

How do you intend to bridge the gap between that which you regarded as essential and that lesser figure that you have received? How are you going to bridge the gap?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

Going back to this meeting next week " whatever its purpose. As far as TfL's budget is concerned, your Mayoral press release 269 on 20 July 2004 stated this: that the Mayor warned that the great majority of the extra funding announced in the transport spending review would be going to Network Rail. As a result TfL had not secured the extra revenue resources. That is a crisis, is it not? What are you going to do about it?

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

It is a pittance is it not, that the advertising rate of £16,000 that you are securing on those last three issues from the Londoner. Is the problem not, as far as the GLA is concerned, that it is all about publicity and communication when you had 100 people involved in communication employed in City Hall and nothing about services, which in the previous question we were talking about cutting?

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 15 September 2004

Mr Mayor, total income from advertising in the Londoner during February and March was only £16,000. The following companies have recently advertised in the Londoner: McNicholas Construction, The Cooperative Bank, Tourism Ireland, Access Online and Western Union. All of them have recently sponsored GLA projects. As a result of this sponsorship, did any or all of these companies receive preferential rates for advertising?