• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

Thank you for that, Mr Livingstone. I asked you the question because I was wondering whether you would be able to cast any light on recent press speculation - partly about Mr Spellar suggesting that, if he did not like your congestion charge scheme, he might be minded to scrap the whole thing; and more recently the stories circulating about a deal to be done, which you were asked about earlier, and about whether you would be prepared to drop your congestion charge if you got the Tube early. Has the DTLR made any representations to you on these matters?

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

I am interested in one particular Minister - the Minister for Best Value, Lord Falconer. What discussions did you have with him about the Dome? I see that you have welcomed the deal under which the Government have finally offloaded this expensive item, but I wondered whether you have had any discussions about whether they might have got a better deal by offering the ability to blow the thing down and finish it. Why do the Government have this obsession to maintain the building, which I think has held back the achievement of a decent contract? I wondered what your...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

So what you told Tony Arbour is correct - that, if there was such a deal on the table, it is not one you would accept: you would not drop your congestion charge in return for getting your hands on the Tube earlier?

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

That obviously prompts a whole series of other questions, but in general terms, then, you agree with a deal under which the Government got nothing, I understand, but a future promise of a share in possible profits - though the percentage has not yet been agreed, apparently - as against the people out there who were willing to take over the site provided they had the right to demolish the building. The company that has taken it over - this is my understanding of those dreadful newspapers and stories that you do not read any more - will take four...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

Let me move on to the document "Public Services for a Growing City", which did not address the effect that your congestion charge will have on public sector workers. We have been talking this week to the National Union of Teachers, and they have told us that they estimate that it will cost each of their members travelling to schools within the zone about £975 a year. These are people with a special case: they have to carry a lot of books and papers. I do not think we would like to see some of our teachers marking papers on...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

Perhaps it would be convenient if you were to publish a list of your alibis on the Web, since you seem so far to have blamed the leaders of the London boroughs, the Government and the PPP. Is there anybody else you would like to add to that list of seasonal goodwill as to why it is everybody's fault but the Mayor's that things do not work in London?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

Are you proposing perhaps also to discuss with the Minister a list of people that you might conveniently blame when things go wrong and are not delivered in London?

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

What do you talk to Stephen Byers about if you never discuss the congestion charge?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

So you think it is less likely, given that it is becoming more bizarre by the moment - a contract that is going to deliver less and less, and make it an impossible environment in which to work?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

In your opinion, then, is the handover of the Tube and commuter rail in the near future more or less likely than it was?