• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

Strikes are illegal in New York, Mr Mayor - that is the difference.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

The industrial action on the Tube is falsely represented as an element of this argument about safety. On Thursday last week, people were very angry that you had let London down. You let London down by promoting industrial action; you let London down by failing to provide extra bus services; you let London down by failing to provide car parking for people who wanted to drive into town when they could not use the Tube; and you have let London down in many ways by this ridiculous assertion that people should walk to work - certainly none of my constituents...

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

Ken, you know that I am not very keen on waffle either; so I will be quite happy with a yes or no answer to this. We have heard from the other end of the table that there is no alternative to PPP, so can you give me an answer to that?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

So you are saying that you are willing to compromise on funding, or to overlook the fact that taxpayers' money is going to be used one way or another to fund these proposals. In a sense you are giving up on bonds, which, according to every transport expert or financier in the world, are the best way forward. So I think you are caving in. Would you agree with that?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

Well, you say that, Mayor, but from everything you have just said to Bob, are we not now heading to some sort of dreadful fudge? There is no compromise position: that has been the problem all the way along in these negotiations. Your negotiations, or Bob Kiley's negotiations, will limit that unified management to certain aspects of the Tube, so ultimately are you not sacrificing safety on the altar of the Treasury's arrogance?

• Question by: Toby Harris
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

Have you instructed Bob Kiley and TfL officers to stop all discussion with the Government's negotiators? If the answer is yes, will you now withdraw that instruction to that, even at this late stage, negotiations and discussions can continue? If the answer is no, will you agree to instruct your negotiators to go that extra mile to try to reach an agreement?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

With respect, the Mayor is not answering my question. Could he just answer it?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 04 April 2001

Before I ask my question, I think we should correct an assertion of the Mayor's about investment in the Underground system. If you take out the great Jubilee line extension and some of the PFI deals that have been done over the last few years on the Tube, investment since 1997 has averaged £500 million a year, as opposed to £370 million a year under the Tories. It is important to get that factually correct. But I want to ask you about the Northern line and the trains there. As you know, I hope, the trains on the Northern line...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 10 October 2001

I don't think anyone is arguing that there should not be development in the Thames Gateway area. Obviously there are huge opportunities but we do need to be aware of the risk. So can I just confirm that you are happy to proceed in terms of the development and regeneration in the area in the spirit of the Environment Agency's advice?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 10 October 2001

The proposed river crossings and the sites that they serve are in areas that, according to the Environment Agency data, are at risk from flooding. Can you confirm what advice you have taken from the Environment Agency to ensure that new businesses, new homes and whatever are not put on land that is prone to risk of flooding?