• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

I think we should record that, because it will be the only part of TfL whose management boards do meet in public. The second question is about the public sector comparator. When I read Lynne Featherstone's question, I thought, "So what??" It begs a number of other questions about the efficient use of money and the project management and asset management skills within the organisation. The fact is - I think you signed up to this when you appeared in front of Gwyneth Dunwoody at the Transport select Committee - that the public sector comparator has been hammered over and...

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

But you are Chair of Transport for London. You have decided to pay the Transport Commissioner. I know that members of the TfL board are sometimes exercised about how they are often cut out of decisions. There is a very close relationship between you and Bob Kiley, and I think you are being a bit disingenuous. In your view, why could Bob Kiley not have given that report to the board in good time, if he was serious? At that point, he was Chair of that board, and if he wanted to have an open meeting, it would have been...

• Question by: Louise Bloom
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

Perhaps this could be an issue for London MPs, particularly London Labour MPs if they were prepared to do it, which is highly doubtful. But perhaps this issue can be pushed, because, as you say, it is clearly ridiculous that this information is not available and that we just do not know. When we take over the Tube, we are expected suddenly to find out this information. I cannot believe that nobody knows; I suspect that we are just not being told

• Question by: Louise Bloom
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

I wanted to return to the question of rolling stock and stations being renewed. We managed to get this information out of Lord Falconer in the Lords after questioning by a Liberal Democrat peer, Tim Razzell. The Mayor: A politician called "Raddle"? Louise Bloom: Razzell - Razzle-Dazzle from Richmond. Tony knows him well; that is why he is looking grumpy. London Underground's website lists 56 stations that are due for renewal between now and April 2006. No mention is made of start dates for renewing rolling stock. We are told that there will be no new vehicles until the second...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

Some of us think that the Government missed a great opportunity after the general election, with a new Secretary of State and so on, to draw a line under it and start again. They did not: they just repeated everything they were saying before the election. Do you have any reason at all for optimism that the Government line will change after the court case, and that what you are saying is likely to come about?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

I assume, and hope, that you would want to abide by this wonderful document "The Greater London Authority Planning Code of Conduct", which the Legal Department provided to me. For those Members who have not read it recently, it talks about transparency, openness of information, fairness and the involvement of Assembly Members. We are not seeing the publication of reports of meetings with potential developers or interested parties. There is no secure system for Assembly Members to be invited to those meetings, as they ought be under the code; and we do not seem to have any system for making...

• Question by: Nicky Gavron
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

One point occurs to me as your Planning Adviser: if developers have access, how are communities to have access? I do not say that what you have said does not stand up, but how are those other interests to have access? That needs to be thought about.

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

Well, I appear to have stumbled on a bigger issue than I had intended to raise! [Laughter.] This document came to me because I made what I thought was a legitimate inquiry of the Legal Department about what my rights of access to information were. The particular issue I wanted to raise, of course, was Jubilee Gardens. It is very important that there is clear understanding of what the proper procedures are in all planning cases. Fuzzy and sloppy procedures around planning are very damaging to public confidence: the community will want to know that they have as much right...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

On planning matters, you had already shown your disdains of Assembly Members by ignoring their views, for example, on the Heron Tower. You have ignored the request of the GLA Planning Committee to have a greater say and involvement before you make decisions. Since most of us have been directly elected - true, we did not get as many votes as you individually, but together we did - do you not think we should be allowed some substantial input into these proposals, and that we should have the proper function of scrutinising your planning decisions, as we are supposed to...

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 18 July 2001

I am sure that Standards Committee will take those comments and discuss them further; but why is your Chief of Staff a member of the Standards Committee if he is not to report back to you on items which are on the agenda, and bring your views to the Committee?