• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

The Assembly accepted the case in respect of the police, but the problem was that starting from scratch meant that inevitably the reserves were rather low. I am sure also of this, but can I ask you, Mayor: will you impress on the Home Secretary and on the Treasury - so far as they ever listen to anybody from outside that building - the need for decisions to be made urgently about central Government assistance in this?

• Question by: Toby Harris
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

Can we assume that the Mayor has not fallen for the stupid and facile suggestion that the Metropolitan Police Service will run out of money in two or three weeks? While the reserves may be exhausted in that period, it is clearly ludicrous to suggest that an organisation with a budget of £2 billion will have run out of money in terms of its' weekly cash flow. I welcome the Mayor's assurance that he accepts that there will be no attempt to stop the measures currently being taken to protect the security of London simply because the reserves have run...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

May I ask, finally, then: are you happy, Mr Mayor, to share in a transparent examination of the background to this leak and this assertion, and of the assurances that were made about funding for the Underground in the coming year? My understanding is that at least some confusion is caused by the fact that it was partly based on the assumption that PPP was going ahead, which would require that level of funding, rather than not going ahead, which may not require that level of funding in the current year.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

On that issue, any such partnership to take forward those schemes will be a PPP of one kind or another. I know that you have acknowledged that in the past, although you may not like it. I have a couple of questions on your presentation on the Underground. First, I suspect that this is a bit of a non-story in The Guardian this morning. It is something of a coincidence that the Director of Finance for the Underground leaves, and shortly afterwards correspondence purporting to be between the Government and the Director of Finance for the Underground appears in The...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

That was precisely the point that I wanted to make. While accepting that there is no risk of the Met ceasing to function, are you aware that there is real concern that the financial pressures being put on the Authority need a swift resolution by the Home Office? Will you take on board the comments that were made by the officers of the MPA to the Authority's Budget Committee only last week about the difficulty they have had in achieving an early resolution? I am sure that you would want to support those who are negotiating on behalf of the...

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

I was interested to hear you say that, when you met the Minister, he gave an absolute commitment to the East London Line going ahead; but would you accept that one has to be cautious of that Minister's absolute commitments, given that London Underground thought they had a pretty absolute commitment to the £700 million of funding but received much less; and given that it is pretty apparent that Railtrack shareholders thought they had commitments from that Minister? Are you satisfied that the commitment from Stephen Byers and his Department is worth anything nowadays? Secondly, do you think that the...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

Let us start tonight. I know that many Members of the Assembly are coming to the London First meeting, where there will be a lot of Ministers and MPs, to discuss transport funding in London. There is no better place than to start tonight.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

I agree with that, because I think that this situation is totally disastrous for London, and both the Mayor and the Assembly are going to have to make strong representations. I still think that we are ruled by fools, however.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

There has been a series of disasters, hasn't there? Would you not have thought that the Government would recognise that this fiasco offers them an opportunity? I think that Stephen Byers has done the right thing over Railtrack by proposing to set up a not-for-profit company; that is the way through. The manner in which it has been handled is appalling, but it offers them the opportunity to do the same for the Tube, because it is a whole new financial ball game now. No one in their right mind would lend money to the PPP scheme. The shares of...

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 17 October 2001

: I am sorry I did not take your investment advice. [Laughter.] But I do not suppose I have much of a pecuniary interest to declare now. For the record, I do not think that it is a direct pecuniary interest in asking a question about investment for the future. I was concerned to hear that you were quite sanguine about the prospects for investment in rail in London. After all, the whole process is now up in the air. The Government are not clear about how they are going to invest in rail transport post-Railtrack. May I also express...