• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

A lot of elderly people who I know are concerned about the quality of their bus service. They are concerned about buses that travel too fast; swerve round corners; stop too fast; bus drivers using mobile phones. With a lot of your new buses there are fewer seats, so they are standing up more often to try and face these perils as well. What are you doing to improve the quality of bus rides for elderly people and for other passengers in London and will you make a decision to reverse your previous decision to reduce the standard of acceptable...

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

At a recent conference on old age, it was suggested that there are lots of factors which play a part in staying fitter, older, which is what we're all concerned about. They suggested that there were two things: one was diet but the other was climbing stairs. Richard has mentioned that this building is not particularly suitable for disabled people; it also has stairs that are not fit for everyday use. Will you ask the developers to make our staircases fit for everyday use? I heard this morning that someone was trapped in there for over an hour because their...

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

So perhaps you are committed to working with the LDA?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

Do you think that is one of the problems, we talk about older Londoners and people assume that means elderly pensioners not people over 50? Can I move on to the wider London issue about older people in the economy? The London Development Agency doesn't really have a strategic approach to ageing and economic development and, from what you have said, it sounds like you might back them taking this issue on more seriously as well. Perhaps you could briefly answer that point.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

How independent is the mediation when the mediator appears to have been identified by one party but has not even been considered by the other - that is Transport for London - and the terms of reference for the mediation have not been considered by the other trade unions who would wish to be party to that?

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

The substance of this question is laid well down in the agenda, 781, but I am sure you can answer it without finding the paper. I understand the point about the timing of the take-over. Your Budget has to be agreed - indeed you have to consult on a Budget well before your licence to take over the Tube - so what provision will you be making in your Consultation Budget for that backdated pay?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

Did you get, during that discussion, any idea of when the Underground is going to be transferred and has your action made it more or less likely that it will be transferred to the control of London Government sooner rather than later?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

Have you had any discussion with Government ministers since you made that commitment and what has their response been?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

If you are looking at securitising, on the basis of congestion charge, in effect it's a tax, isn't it? If you reduce the number of cars coming into London you wouldn't have that income stream. So, it's not about discouraging cars coming into town; it's about another way of raising money, isn't it?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 23 October 2002

You made some of those points last week, but if you want to use the congestion charge to securitise a bond, does that not mean that you cannot actually scrap it, which is something you undertook to do if it wasn't working? Does that not mean that you wouldn't be able to do that? So, you were not being completely honest when you said that you would scrap it if it failed.