• 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?

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

This is obviously not a question which is either anti the unions or, of course, any of the individuals, but do I understand you to say that rather than having one union representative it was necessary to have representatives from all 3 relevant unions?

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

Is the Mayor, therefore, confirming that 4 out of the 14 who have particular union interests are not there in representative capacity but will be looking at the interests of all who have a concern with the workings of transport in London?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

The reason behind this question is very straightforward. I think someone - was it Simon Jenkins - described Ken as having a Jekyll and Hyde character. In the same way, I was left thinking after the last question that maybe it was a bit reckless for him to stand on the roof of Romney House and announce we were all going to have a party without actually thinking through the financial implications of it. Perhaps he should have consulted more widely. Yet on the other hand I found myself in writing this question wondering, as I lie awake at night...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

Because it's money, I agree we must look at what the cost actually is, but whether it is £3 million or £1 million or whatever the cost is it will be a significant additional cost and whatever that is it will have to be found from somewhere and if it has to be found from within the existing budget it will only be found at the expense of policing elsewhere, so I come back to my question, not actually whether the £3 million is justified, we will look closely at that, but the additional cost, whatever it is, where does...

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 29 June 2000

I am Chair of the MPA Finance Committee and I am concerned about the £3 million budget. You said that there was no provision in the Mayor's budget. well there is no provision in the Metropolitan Police budget either. The £3 million has to come from somewhere. If it has to come in the end from within the Police budget then it will mean that that money is not being spent elsewhere on policing in London at other times, so I would be interested to know, and I am sure we will have further discussions about it, where you envisage...