• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

The problem with consultation, I think, doesn't just extend to Assembly Members; it extends to people across London. You have a plan at the moment, again one of TfL's projects, to put a bus lane into the Brompton Road, to extend the bus lane there. Yet, 83% of the residents of that area have stated that they were not consulted and 55% of the businesses along there claim they were not consulted by TfL either. It's an experimental scheme, but do you not think when you hear figures like that and the surprise of people that there's something seriously wrong...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

Well obviously I know Kumar quite well in the East End and I respect quite a lot of the work that he's done. I appreciate you've made it clear that you want the activities of the London Muslim Coalition, which is an independent group, to be clearly distinguished as separate from the GLA. You seem to feel that there's no contradiction between that and Kumar's continuing active role in that coalition as a facilitator of that and I respect that as well. Obviously there are challenges. The problem I have is the letter which Kumar sent to the Jewish Chronicle...

• Question by: Toby Harris
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

But with respect, Ken, what I'm trying to clarify is at what point would you say, "Hold on, irrespective of whether this is relevant to the subject to which I have asked you to give me advice, I now find the remarks you have made or the way you have said them to be unacceptable and I therefore wish you to step down from that role"? Would you, for example - and let's take an extreme example and one which I'm sure none of your advisors would ever wish to take - if one of them said that paedophilia should...

• Question by: Toby Harris
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

Clearly from the action that you've taken, for example in asking that the address be changed and so on, you wish to distance yourself from the views that were expressed by Kumar Murshid. Could I ask, how far does one of your paid advisors have to go before you decide that they are a liability to you and that you wish to get rid of them? What is the point at which you will say, "I am sorry, because of what you are saying you are damaging my position"? What is the point at which you are going to say...

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

It was an interesting day in all sorts of ways because to see Muslims protesting with Orthodox Jews against that rally was a sight that I never expected to see. It's not my job to defend Murshid, but I have here a letter that he sent to The Jewish Chronicle which does to some extent explain how his remarks ought to be understood. I'm not sure if people have had access to that letter or not, but it might be worth circulating if people are concerned with this matter.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

You're right that that's the policy of all main and decent parties. How, though, can Mr Murshid's position as a member of your advisory cabinet be sustainable when he has set his name to a press release in such extreme terms as to drive a coach and horses through your and this organisation's commitment to equalities and to community solidarity and fighting against racism? How can he remain?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

The next line in this press release, in Kumar Murshid's name, amongst that of two others, says, "We therefore call upon all decent people not to join this assembly of hatred which poses a major threat to community relations, not only in London, but in the whole of Britain". Do you think it appropriate for any advisor of yours, whatever their capacity, to put his name to a press release which describes a meeting organised by a reputable representative group of the Jewish community in this country as an assembly of hatred, as even remotely appropriate language for a cabinet...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

Your reply there reads virtually verbatim from the reply which you sent to the Board of Deputies of British Jews. May I suggest that there's a further issue in this? You have told us that you gave permission, rightly I think every one of us will say, for the Israel Solidarity Campaign to hold a rally in Trafalgar Square. That was a meeting which was addressed by Members of Parliament from both Labour and Conservative and, I think also, the Liberal Democrat Party, and was a well-attended body. Your cabinet advisor then put his name to a press release -...

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

Mr Livingstone, I accept your statement in good faith and I'm glad you've made it and I was glad to hear it, but to say that you have no power and then infer that his employment status blurs this issue, frankly that is just not true. He presented himself as an employee of this authority, as, in fact, a member of your staff. Now, I'm glad you don't agree with him, I don't agree with him. It's a tragic situation out there. But it draws us all into it and it makes it look, to the general public, that we...

• Question by: Trevor Phillips
• Meeting date: 16 July 2002

Just as a matter of fact for the Assembly, indeed I do sit, as John does, with Members of the LMC and on this particular occasion I did ask for the Assembly to be disassociated from these comments. I think the issue here, Ken, is a very simple one. The meeting where this was discussed, the place where it was produced from was here and there was a use, effectively, of GLA resources and I think what the Assembly members want you to make sure that, whatever your view is, that GLA resources are used in line with what the...