• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

Ken, how often do you actually travel on the South London overground suburban rail? And if you ever do, and I am sure you do, you must notice the appalling state of the track?side, the graffiti, the litter and so on, which frankly makes a mockery of the Capital Standards and is an appalling advertisement to visitors to London travelling from Gatwick for instance. What pressure can you put on the rail authorities to actually tidy up the track?side, clear up the graffiti and to improve the appearance of their stations?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

We have 324 overground Stations in London and only 42 of them have `secure station" status. Three of them are in my patch: London Bridge, Waterloo and Waterloo East. In fact, Ken, I have spent the last year meeting the rail operators, visiting the stations, collecting data, talking to Network Rail and British Transport Police. I have to say that the rail department you created within Transport for London has been hugely useful in all of that process. I think they are an important organisation to do with partnership working. The South London Metro is one of the first fruits...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

Can I hope then for a swift reply to the letters that I wrote asking for your support in the representations I made in the Minutes to the SRA on those two points?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

I think the residents in my constituency of Bexley and Bromley will think that they have waited rather a long time for these things to be on their way. Because since they are wholly dependent upon the overground for their significant transport services, they are concerned that it took two and half years before the directions and guidance were issued, and that any significant proposals are going to be right the way through the first term of the Mayoralty. Can you understand from that there is a very strong perception that you have very little interest in the commuters coming...

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

I have got the Act here.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

But what you are saying is through the non-exercise of those powers there have not been any extra trains, particularly for the long-haul journeys, or any extra stock for commuter London. Are you testing out how far your powers extend? For example, have you actually asked the SRA's opinion on whether an instruction of yours would have an adverse effect on London? Because if he agrees with you there is not a problem.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

You do have powers under the GLA Act to also issue instructions both on the services, and the state of the railways in London. How many instructions have you issued?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

No, my supplementary is going to be why had you not come to the Assembly with a package of measures for the overland as you did with the roads and buses and so forth to allow us to do that. So I welcome that. And provided we can have a genuine dialogue we can see if we can redress the balance for the overground users.

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

Can I invite you to reconsider withdrawing and re-stating the answer you gave to my colleague, Lynne Featherstone, that you would not issue an instruction under the Act because it might cost money. You have never been shy of spending money. You do not refuse to improve the buses because it will cost money. You do not refuse to improve the roads because it will cost money. Why should you discriminate against users of the overground? Why do you refuse to use your powers on the grounds that it will cost money to sort the problems out? Of course it...

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

It is really a question -