• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

I take it, then, that you are restating your declaration about openness. I should like to see in writing precisely how that is going to be implemented. A particular problem with scrutiny bodies is getting information about exactly what is going on - for example, on the transport spending review.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

On the subject of consultation and openness, I notice from your flier that all your "meet the Mayor" events are scheduled for venues in central London. Does that not mean that you are continuing to be a "zone 1 Mayor"?

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

This is not so much a complaint about deliberate holding back - I hope - as a request for greater efficiency. Are you aware, Ken, that at least one Assembly Member has not had replies to any letters to you, including one written in May? As part of your assurance, which I accept in absolute good faith, that you wish to be open with Assembly Members, will you look at the way the office is operating, to ensure that written requests for information are satisfied and letters are answered?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

Could you answer the first and more important part of my question: are you prepared to restate your commitment to openness, and will you lay before the Assembly standards for responding to requests for information?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

We might need to get the textual analysts to reflect on that one. The boroughs and areas that I represent do not necessarily have a problem with the principle, but they want to see the detail, as Valerie Shawcross said. They are not convinced that, on the timescale to which you have nailed yourself, this is achievable. They are saying two things. The first is: "Ken Livingstone wants to get it in place mid-term so that the initial unpopularity can be got out of the way and he can help himself to get elected" - a noble politician's objective, but...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

It is inevitable that the majority of Assembly Members represent areas substantially outside the zone. As Valerie Shawcross has said, in many areas there is support for looking at congestion charging as part of a package; but the fundamental problem is, what is that package? People are saying, "Ken Livingstone put congestion charging in his manifesto. He stated that his credibility stands or falls by it, that he is hellbent on getting it in midway through his term." I can sense the beginnings of retreat here, and the Assembly's role is to make your retreat as graceful as possible if...

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

Just supposing that the majority view of the population of London is that the scheme does not look workable on paper, and there are intractable problems. If there was massive opposition - although that is not something that I personally would welcome - would you be prepared to drop the proposals? If so, what alternative strategy would there be for reducing congestion in areas such as Lambeth and Southwark, where it causes serious suffering?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

Thank you very much for that. You will be interested to know that both Lambeth and Southwark Councils have now expressed support in principle for congestion charging. But there is huge, huge concern about the details of the scheme. Particularly, people in south London feel that they have had a very bad deal from public transport, and improvements are crucial there. To what extent would you be willing to extend and perhaps deepen the consultation and the development process if you felt that you had not yet got it right? We need to see this as an efficient, effective and...

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

I hate to contradict and teach my grandmother to suck eggs, but, according to RoSPA, being able to swim does not protect someone from drowning. In the case in Hackney, the child was three and was accompanied by his five-year-old sister. They walked through a gate that was completely accessible to children. This is a basic, simple thing. I am working with the Chair of the Assembly and other bodies to provide the simple mechanism that would have saved that three-year-old. It is shocking that, only a mile or so away, there were measures that would have prevented that death...

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 13 September 2000

One thing that arose from the death of Kareem Tawaih in Hackney is that, just up the road in Tottenham, child safety gates had been installed four years earlier. This may be too much detail for the spatial development strategy, but there are issues such as child safety which cut across borders and could be included in the strategy. Particularly where large concentrations of families live near waterways, Londoners would be reassured if they could believe that the SDS included some overview and ensured that there was a Londonwide strategy for dealing with issues of safety where there are large...