• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

I am a bit concerned about the process of allocation, at the basic borough level; three wards per borough does discriminate against larger boroughs like Croydon. But in terms of the allocation being locally determined, I am concerned that it should not be entirely driven by the issue of social deprivation because the problems is when you do that by ward, you will end up with repeating the mistakes you sometimes get with Government allocations. The smaller neighbourhoods suffering from high crime will get excluded; from my area places like Monkshill or Shrublands or certain parts of North Sutton. What...

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

I agree with you, Mayor, that we have set the agenda at the MPA and I am proud of that but I am still worried that we do not have the accurate figures. For example, there are no infrastructure support services figures in the basic business case figure of £364 million.

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

Are you satisfied, Mayor, that the step-change business case made by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) and stated to you and to ourselves as the full cost of the step-change programme, can be relied on, for example, the business case put forward is £364 million over three years. The Deputy Commissioner, in a recent speech, mentioned £500 million and the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, for Territorial Policing, recently said £750 million over three years. So, we are all a bit perplexed. Have you got a handle on the figures?

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

You have got to actually be honest with the people of London. Where is your financial strategy? Where do you want to take London? What do you expect them to pay? We have already nearly doubled their Council Tax. Deal with the cards that are there, not those you wish you had.

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

No, you are the Mayor of London with a financial strategy.

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

This is an interesting ramble but you are not answering the question. How high do you think the precept should go? To achieve step-change it will need to treble.

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

You have used an interesting phrase: that we should make a contribution ourselves for the policing of London. If you compare the population of the Metropolitan Police districts, in London we already pay, on the last published figures, £50 per head. I know that this year we are actually paying nearer £60 per head. In Merseyside they are only paying £29 per head, in Northumbria it is £23 per head, in Greater Manchester £21 per head, West Midlands £17 per head and West Yorkshire £16 per head. So we are paying almost double in this metropolitan police district to every...

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

Well, you are not very successful at that. We have had an 84% Council Tax increase since you have been around. So that is not much success.

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

Yes, but with respect, you promised that this would be met by central government. You are now actually going halfway. You are saying some of it is going to be met by the Council Tax. How much is going to be met by the Council Tax- payer, next year?

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 19 November 2003

You previously said that any new funding for police officers would have to come from central government. Yet, if you put the first step-change officers on the 2004/05 budget, which it now sounds like you are agreeing to, that is an extra £32 million that is going to be borne by the Council Tax payers. So have you gone back on your word to Londoners, and secondly, what incentive, in the future, is there for government to cough up the money when you are agreeing the first part of the programme and adding it on the Council Tax? Is it...