• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

I think this is a useful discussion. I only started reading your Business Plan today, but the idea of working in partnership with you to take the case to Government strikes me and my colleagues in the Labour group as far more constructive than the shroud waving approach. I am pleased you have clarified that. One area where we might have concern though is in getting the balance right between the capital and revenue schemes and between the very necessary investments in places like the Thames Gateway and continuing to meet the subsidy costs of bus services. I seek an...

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

Can I go on to your differences with Bob Kiley, because he has suggested two ways of funding a budget gap, if there still is one after the Government has given you all this money. One is through borrowing and one is through raising fares, both of which you said you will not do. So is there a split between you and your Commissioner at the moment?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

I am not sure if that made you confident that they would respond to your seductive skills, given that it has gone from a £565 million projected hole to £900 million, without the Tube, that you are asking for. I am not sure you are not burying your head in the sand here. I want to know what `Plan B" is in terms of what you will have to drop or whether you will face increased fares as Bob Kiley suggests. Where are you going on this if your seductive skills fail, as I fear they might?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

I am glad you mentioned the Congestion Charge, because of course you originally projected that you would raise £200 million a year from that, then it was £120 million, then £65 million and now we understand it will be less than £10 million a year. Of course, you have had to pay £35 million to Capita to protect their profits and improve the service they are offering. Do you think that represents efficient and cost?effective use of the TfL budget?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

In your news statement which accompanied your announcement on 21 October you stated and it must be true because it says it there that `over the last three years TfL has shown that every penny allocated to transport in London is used efficiently and cost effectively." Do you think it is efficient and cost effective for TfL to have seven different marketing and communications departments?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

And would you not be better advised to invite the main party candidates to join you so that this is genuinely London asking for its fair share of national resources rather than Ken Livingstone and his so?called seductive skills?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

Just to pursue that, all this seems to rest on your seductive skills. Given that, and I appreciate that your mission in life as you get out of bed in the morning is to bring joy into all our lives, do you think it is really helpful to have the Mayor of London talking about Gordon Brown, who is the ultimate paymaster in all this in the following terms, and I quote: `For years the Treasury has been run by aliens, whose objective is the destruction of all life on this planet, and they are just starting with local government."...

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

It was the difference with Bob Kiley I was pursuing. Before I hand over to Mike, Bob Kiley was describing the funding situation as make?or?break; it is in choppy waters, heading off the cliff. So he does not quite share your confidence. On the BBC's Politics Show he said that the Thames Gateway Bridge, West London Tram and East London Line Extension would be at risk. So do you agree with your Transport Commissioner that that is a position, a `Plan B" that you are not acknowledging at the moment?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

Of course, this is a complete calumny. I made the point to you that it is the District Line station which is being closed, not stations being closed. Here is a wonderful opportunity for you now as the supremo of the Underground. When I asked Crossrail why they had put in this link, the new corridor to Kingston, they said it was going to be extremely profitable. The way for you to take advantage of this in your role as Chairman of TfL would be to say why not extend the District Line to follow the particular route which Crossrail...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 22 October 2003

Of course, that answer is sheer pedantry because the District Line Stations at Kew Gardens and Richmond will close as indeed will Gunnersbury Station. Are you aware that in the leaflet which is being distributed right across the proposed Crossrail route, there is no mention, either in any figure drawing the Crossrail proposals or indeed in the text, which even hints that District Line services will be removed from those three stations? Are you aware that when I raised this matter with Tim O'Toole at the last meeting of the Transport Committee I asked him whether or not he was...