• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

Before the election and immediately afterwards you were very sceptical about the wisdom of moving into the building. That was scepticism which you know I shared with you. I am interested to know what is it that has changed. What has changed your mind, Ken?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

Can I just be clear about this. Will you assure us that the fact that you have appointed, as you observed to Sally Hamwee, representatives of no less than 3 unions to the Board of Transport for London has nothing to do with both the political and declared financial support that was given by those unions to your election campaign. Will you assure us that this isn't a buy off for your union friends?.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

I am delighted to hear that you want to get away from the culture of contempt. Some of us might think that having the General Secretary of the RMT that has just balloted for industrial action which is going to cause misery to untold numbers of London passengers is exactly that culture of contempt. Has Mr Knapp undertaken that he will renounce that culture and will no longer pursue that approach?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

It is more than just having the cycling work finished though, it is actually keeping the interests in mind of those people.

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

That's great. What about cyclists who are the other minority interest that I feel isn't represented and clearly you are not going to represent them either?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

I do understand that the Green Party was not represented on the GLC and so you didn't have any of our old hacks that you trusted to put onto the transport authority but what concerns me is that while some of us are passengers some of the time and some of us are drivers for some of the time, almost all of us are pedestrians for a lot of the time. I am not sure that there is anyone who represents those interests.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

Excellent. So although the cooperation and partnership with Westminster City Council will be helpful it is not a prerequisite and Westminster are not going to be allowed to scupper your ambitious plans for pedestrianisation or for other matters concerning congestion and other issues to deal with traffic problems in Central London.

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

There is a lot of useful information in that, for which thank you. But I wonder, I don't think the Mayor has answered the second part of the question about whether the notes of the meeting are available or perhaps I could invite him to do so and ask whether he thinks it would be helpful if such information were in future included in his report.

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

I think the Mayor may have misunderstood me. I don't challenge his conclusion at this point. It is very difficult for members of the Assembly to do so because we don't have the information. I am concerned that the process is seen to be one which ensures for Londoners that we come to the right conclusion.

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

Thank you for that. I believe that that is the first time that those figures have been made public and I think that it is very important that they are public but do you not agree that it is also important that there is a full report made and discussed so that members of the public may be assured of the detailed exercise which are the authority undertake to satisfy itself on behalf of the public that the building will provide value for money?