• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Do you agree, Ken, that what is important is not just the budget line: it is expenditure of the amounts which are in those budget lines over the year, and delivery of these services? Can you do what you can to persuade the functional bodies that, the more open they are with this Assembly, the more constructive a dialogue we can have on the delivery of services?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

In addition, I hope, to taking on board as genuinely as possible - I am not yet reassured by what you have said about taking aboard the Assembly's concerns about early information, both from your own officers and from the functional bodies - will you also, bearing in mind what has happened this year, give an undertakeing to consult the boroughs - both the ALG and the boroughs individually - at a much earlier stage in the process, perhaps even before your first draft proposals are laid before the Assembly, to get their views on the likely precept?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Do you accept that one of the problems that the Budget Committee had - and perhaps one of the reasons it had to meet so many times - was that extracting information, particularly when one required any supporting detail for the assertions that were made - was a bit like extracting teeth? Do you agree that, when the officers report to you, you should bear in mind in particular the words of your new Cabinet member, Sir Robin Wales, that we need to work to ensure that any future increase in the GLA precept proposed by the Mayor is kept...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

: Thank you - that is encouraging news. Everyone has said that they are willing to release these documents, but it took until November to get sight of them. I therefore welcome the fact that they are going to be published. Will you also release the background reports, which are especially important for the debate on the regeneration benefits? We need a proper public debate on this, and there are people who are extremely sceptical about the 48,000 jobs that it is claimed these crossings could bring.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Thanks to you and Len for, hopefully, bringing about a more informed and enlightened public debate.

• Question by: Victor Anderson
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

This policy has recently been reaffirmed by Michael Portillo, who is obviously a very important member of the Conservative party, and will probably be its leader in a couple of months. [Interruption.] This policy will have a big impact on London, but Central Office tells me that they are willing to make an exception for London and keep the LDA. [Interruption.]

• Question by: Victor Anderson
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

• Question by: Trevor Phillips
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Bob Neill, do you know anything about this?

• Question by: Louise Bloom
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Are you saying, then, that you would agree with Lady Runciman, who said, "Our most far-reaching recommendations have been rejected. That leaves us with a law that is out of touch with reality, misleading in its rank of relative harm, disproportionate in its sanctions, dependent on police discretion to be workable, and out of step with public attitudes."? Possibly the key thing there is "dependent on police discretion". That particularly worries me because what Sir John Stevens says and what actually happens out there on the street are two completely different things. As you said, there is the question of...

• Question by: Trevor Phillips
• Meeting date: 28 February 2001

Why don't you and I set up a Puritan Tendency here, Ken?