• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

Isn't the real problem that we are getting dangerously close to the actual carnival - it is only three months away - and, as I understand it, we cannot press the "go" button on funding for the extra stewards because the Carnival Review Group, on which I sit, is still waiting for Notting Hill Carnival Trust to come with IRIS and make a presentation to the group so that our Chairman, Lee Jasper, can give the thumbs up? Isn't the real problem that the Notting Hill Carnival Trust is dragging its feet, and there seems to be no sense of...

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

It seems to me that Londoners and carnivalgoers would prefer to have ex-paras rather than William Hague and his baseball cap out there. [Interruption.] No, it isn't. Ken, don't you and those people involved in getting the carnival funded and keeping it where it is as a jewel in London's crown feel that whatever is done will not satisfy those critics and certain members of the Tory party on the GLA?

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

May I pursue the relationship with the GLA, which is going to be the paymaster? Will we be responsible for whatever these ex-paras do on the streets of Notting Hill, or will you?

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

Thank you, Mr Mayor. I understand that the 500 stewards are broken down into the 200 normal community stewards of last year and 300 further stewards from a company called ISIS or IRIS. ISIS is an education company, so I do not suppose it is that - we are not to have pupils out there. I believe that these stewards are ex-paras. Are you happy with having ex-paras on the streets of Notting Hill who, according to your adviser, will use "a solid command and control structure to inject discipline into the proceedings and to introduce more rigorous training"? [Laughter.]...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

I knew you were going to pick on me first. The answer to the question about policing in Sutton is that, under the 1,050, an additional 20 officers would come to Sutton; but, as they were already in Sutton - Sutton being the only London borough which at that time was, at least on the figures, over strength - the Commissioner allowed the borough to keep those 20 officers in anticipation of the new ones arriving. That is the answer. It is still not enough. May I go back, Chair, with your permission, to the original question, on boundaries? When...

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

I am reassured to hear that the imperial purple banner will not be taken over the border into Epsom - although I am surprised, in that case, that you chose to tell a joke to the Advertiser series reporter. On an important point arising from that People's Question Time, the issue of street crime in Sutton has been raised on two occasions. The first time, we felt that there was some bemusement and amusement that there should be concern about this issue in Sutton. Although, as in other boroughs, crime generally has fallen, street crime is a very important issue...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

London is of its nature an artificial region, and relates far more to the south-east. Do you have a programme of meetings with the regional development agencies and assemblies which are building up around London, and with the county council leaders, in order to discuss issues of concern? There are a range of transport issues, for example. The Croxley +-link pops up from time to time: because it is London Underground but it is outside London's boundaries, it appears to be a child that does not have a parent. There are questions about policing and about cross-boundary bus services and...

• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

Your comments about Bob Kiley and the CIA suggest the kind of Walter Mitty world in which we live. Is this agreement not just a political fudge to try to get the Government through the election? If, by accident, a Labour Government are re-elected, the hand that you and Mr Kiley hold will essentially expire. Is it not important that you play that hand very strongly during the election period, to ensure that there is a solution before it is over? Otherwise, a Labour Government will just renege on the agreement with you.

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

What you said about Bob Kiley trying to negotiate with two different teams, with such opposing views, illustrates one of the problems. The circumvention, which is to impose a preferred solution on another, is hardly likely to lead to goodwill and good working conditions. In the light of that, it is clear that PPP is still going ahead and will at some point require the Government to bale it out financially; so I thought perhaps you could explain this piece in the Labour manifesto - and excuse the sunglasses; I broke my normal ones at the beginning of the campaign...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 23 May 2001

Can I then ask you about the contracts that you told us about in your report? You say that, once you have a contract you like, that can be imposed on the other bidder. How can you do that? Legally, a contract is something negotiated by two willing partners: how could you impose a contract on a private company?