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

So you are saying that you have discussed very recently with Ministers and with Stephen Byers or with civil servants the handover possibility of the Tube or commuter rail, and on the Tube he has said that it is subject to his two provisos, as ever - and on rail?

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

I am glad that you think that Londoners will vote for best delivery of services, because you will also agree, no doubt, that they will be voting for the Conservatives in Westminster, where delivery is very good. For once, I agree with Lynne. I think that you put your political allegiances before London at the last election. There is no doubt that you allowed yourself to be persuaded to put the problems of the Tube on the back burner while Bob Kiley was briefly popped into a job which, as soon as the election was over, he was popped straight...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

And the congestion charge question?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

The quid pro quo of your fighting against the PPP and the Secretary of State's deliberations in January is whether you will personally accept and be bound by the decision he makes. Secondly, do you think it is adequate in that context that TfL's transition team which is dealing with taking on the Tube is being led by a public relations specialist? Finally, can you rule out the possibility of your cancelling the congestion charge on the basis that the PPP has delayed Tube improvements to such an extent that you do not think you can go ahead with it...

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

I still think that you bottled out on really attacking the Government over the Tube during the general election. The Mayor: [indicating Labour Members] They don't think so. Lynne Featherstone: However, we are now moving to local elections in London, and the question is whether, in May, you will put body and soul into campaigning against the PPP.

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

I look forward to that. Truth will out. Suppose the PPP, sadly, goes ahead, and we come to the local borough elections in May. As you know, I thought that you were somewhat weak in campaigning in the General Election, and you argued then that you could not identify one issue. In the local elections, will you commit yourself to campaigning to turn them into a referendum to ask London to make its opinion known to the Government if they have gone ahead?

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

On a point of order, Madam Chairman. Are we here to plan Liberal party campaign tactics in the local elections, or to try to do something about London? The Chair: It is not a point of order. Please continue to ask and answer relevant questions.

• Question by: Louise Bloom
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

Are you aware of the report by European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addictions, which carried out ecstasy testing schemes in different European countries, and drew the conclusions that testing not only helps consumer awareness but also provides a chance for education and counselling for drugs users who traditionally ignore outreach programmes and fall into the hard-to-reach category; and that regular testing will help scientific research and police information by providing information about consumer trends?

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 19 December 2001

I agree that some more research should be done. It is all very well for liberal-minded, educated people to say, "Oh, declassify this, declassify that," so that they can have a spliff on a Sunday after their roast lunch. I am totally against that. Ecstasy is a very dangerous drug. It does not matter how many deaths it causes quantified against other deaths - even one is too many. The Liberal party should talk to Leah Betts's father and find out just how upset they are because that young girl took ecstasy in a club and died the next morning...

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

Would you agree that one should be very cautious about extending the sort of categories of drugs which should be either decriminalised or placed into different categories? Do you agree that it is important, particularly with ecstasy, to take the advice of the police very strongly aboard, because for many it falls into a different category from cannabis? Would you also bear in mind the experience of those of us involved in the criminal justice system, whether officers or lawyers, that dealers will often deal both in ecstasy and in class A drugs - an important distinction from the situation...