• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

You talk about being a bit player. I don't consider the fact that you have control over the key traffic lights at Piccadilly Circus, or along Regent Street, High Holborn, Shaftesbury Avenue and all of those changes, it says here, "The effect on the network is going to be severe". I don't call that being a bit player. I call that being central to the gridlock in Central London.

• Question by: Len Duvall OBE
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

There's a wider problem here, Mr Mayor. I think I believe the answer you've given. Obfuscation only exists when this story has been around for some months. Now, a question was raised by Toby Harris to you, we get Derek Turner coming to yesterday's meeting, you spend two weeks of your time doing this work, the real issue is about how TfL operates. It operates actually in secrecy and I'll give you an example. The wider issues are how they work. The A2 - not the whole A2, the A2 bridge - is a contract that's due to finish this...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

But don't you recognise that a large part of the problem here is a lack of information? People turn up at Trafalgar Square, they suddenly find everything's changed and there's no real explanation until three weeks later there's an expose in the Evening Standard. And no one seems to be in charge of it. And it does point to you because not only are you the Mayor, you're the Chair of Transport for London. What are you going to do about that?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

Well, I think I've been fairly generous to you so far this morning, but all good things come to an end. I think there is a problem here. There's a real credibility problem. Your answer was lengthy and technically probably very correct, but as far as Londoners are concerned, there are a lot of things happening on our road network, traffic lights, junctions, road works, and no one seems to be properly in control. I put it this way, that there seem to be a bunch of mad scientists, if you like, within Transport for London who've got lots of...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

But you're not answering my question. I asked you whether you could provide me with the details of the extra time added to a journey from Kings Cross to Parliament. Could TfL do that for me? And I'm not talking about the traffic light changes that are going to be changed again. I'm actually talking about the ones that you yourself describe as permanent. And while we're on the subject of those permanent changes, I notice that several of them, in very, very key areas of Central London, are actually described by your own document as causing severe saturation, a...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

Well, forgive me for being a little bit sceptical, but it does appear to me, looking at the list of traffic light changes that you have listed for us, that actually almost every single one of them takes place inside the congestion charging zone. So, that does make me feel rather suspicious. Can I ask you, would you be prepared to ask TfL to provide me with a detailed map so that we can plot the time changes for any journey made between say Kings Cross and Parliament Square since you made the permanent changes to so many of the...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

I'm sorry, but it's not acceptable for Londoners to be left in the situation where you are saying, "Well, okay, some things are said privately, other things are said publicly". That is no way to run a city, is it, Mr Livingstone? Frankly, it wasn't just some loose wording given to me or to the press, it was a very detailed conversation and it was quite clear from the minutes taken that Londoners and other people coming to London are already suffering from the effects of traffic light changes that are directly connected to your congestion charging. I am very...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 June 2002

That was a long answer. I think it must be the first time that a question from the Assembly has produced such a flurry of activity on the eve of Mayoral Question Time. You won't be surprised to hear that I don't find much of it very convincing. I want to try and sort out some of the confusion that seems to be going on here, the confused messages that are coming out. You say here, in your document, that none of the traffic signal changes that have been made are in any way connected to congestion charging and yet...

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

The second point I wanted to raise with you earlier was the planning system. Now, you have just mentioned commercial developments. Can you tell us what the implications are of the fact that the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill, published last week, will not include the concept of carrots, but will include new guidance on how to make the planning obligation system of negotiations between planners and developers more transparent and simple. Do we know what that involves and how does that reflect what the Mayor has been lobbying for?

• Question by: Trevor Phillips
• Meeting date: 11 December 2002

I'm sure that the Member for Barnet and Camden will share my view that we do need exactly as you have been saying, but I am sure he will also be concerned at the circulation of a leaflet I have in front of me, which was circulated during the last local council election. It says, "Barnet Council forces through social housing despite soaring crime rises". It seems to me clearly to link social housing with crime. Does that bother you?