• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 16 January 2002

There should be some good things happening because of the investments. What I'm saying to you is there are still clearly many problems with the issues of convoys and what I'm looking to you for is not for you to always quote back to me the good bits that you are doing but to deal with the problematic challenges that remain.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 16 January 2002

I'm asking to go one stage further than that. If there is all this detail the Assembly might be able to translate it to the people that we're all in touch with because what you do in kilometres travelled or bus rider-ship and all of those things means absolutely nothing in terms of the man in the street. Maybe it's a translation thing and you need to think about how the public are going to understand that you're being so wonderful in the money you're asking for. I don't think at this moment in time London is going to understand...

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 16 January 2002

Okay, but the thing is the first stop seems to be the people of London. It may be an issue of programming. There is an assumption that you have to go ahead and do all of this at this speed. All I'm saying to you is can you provide me with a schedule so that I can examine your judgement on it? You may be right, you may be wrong.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 16 January 2002

Can I move on to the performance indicator area where I think TfL is exceptionally weak? It's another area where I think it's very difficult to go to London when they have nothing really to measure it by. Bus rider-ship is fantastic. In a way, ironically, it's probably lucky we didn't get the tube because buses would never have had this manner of investment if you'd had other toys in your box. However, I do think that when you look at performance indicators we need to know that these are performance indicators that London would want. I listen to what...

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

But you are content for the Assembly to have a transparent examination of what it is that you have vetoed?

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

Actually this is a hedge against the future really. It's not actually specific. What you're really doing is setting up a fund for, let's say, the next two or three years, to ensure we don't have too much trouble maybe the year after next. Is that what you're trying to do?

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

So you're saying that your dealing with Government totally funds the congestion charging package and should be ignored as one of the lines in this years budget?

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

And you have never considered the impact that will have on London taxpayers?

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

You've never quizzed them on the method by which you might want to buy this scheme?

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

So you're the chair of TfL and you're basically saying you've never actually looked at it? You've never asked the board to look at the justifications as to how you'd structure this spending?