• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

Are you aware that TfL has written to the Director of the Ambulance Service to ask him for his statistics and apparently he has not replied? Perhaps he does not actually have those statistics; perhaps they do not exist. Secondly, are you aware that I have suggested to TfL that we should actually start reclaiming money from Barnet Council? If they take out any road humps that have actually been paid for with TfL money then that money should be recouped.

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

I am very glad that you mentioned loss of life because you presumably would agree with the Chairman of the London Ambulance Service NHS Trust. He has quoted the figure of 500 unnecessary deaths in London alone caused by road humps and other traffic calming delaying ambulances and causing injury to passengers in ambulances, which compares to the 300 - tragically too high - road deaths in London each year.

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

We have just removed 42 in Brunswick Park Road, Mr Mayor. On the issue of congestion, would you not feel that TfL's money would be better spent improving traffic flow and encouraging the boroughs to improve traffic flow on the borough principle roads, which would reduce the need to rat-run through residential roads?

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

Mr Mayor, I can tell from that that you are not a very regular driver. As you know, these cushions just enable you to line up the wheel base of your car and take it down the middle of the road at high speed and avoid any inconvenience at all. That is why they are put there for the benefit of fire engines and ambulances. They are also there for the benefit of boy racers. From your answer, do I understand that you are not exactly a great fan of road humps?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

There was some discussion about sharing the data of persistent offenders " people who evade car parking charges, bus fines, speeding fines and congestion charging " that TfL has, the Pan London Safety Camera Partnership has and the boroughs have. Has that gone forward at all?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

I am on the same theme actually; I think that demonstrates that there is a big problem. Yesterday I had a classic piece of TfL congestion charging casework. My constituent paid his bill in April. A letter had gone missing so he was told that he had not appealed in time and yesterday he was in touch with me saying that TfL are not just treating him in a way that he finds rather rude and time consuming but are threatening to take him to court action. He had been evidencing to them since the dispute first arose that there...

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

Do you think that there is something wrong with your procedure because I am sure that they do not want to wilfully delay this rather unpleasant process any more than TfL does?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

But one assumes that is because of common errors in the system that so many cases are effectively let off by TfL as soon as someone submits evidence of a mistake.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

In the latest report to the TfL panels, it is still the case - is it not? - that the vast majority of people who appeal against their Congestion Charge fine are let off by Transport for London and in effect no evidence is offered. Why is that the case and what is being done to reduce that number?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

): It is not commercially sensitive to tell the Chair of Transport, even the Liberal Democrat Transport spokesperson, how many vehicles have been clamped. That should be openly available information to any member of this Assembly who asks. It is not right to give people the run-a-round. It is my job to hold this to account.