• Question by: Andrew Pelling
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

You mentioned earlier the importance of consultation. When you consult on the congestion charges, will you consult both on how it is to be introduced and indeed whether it should be introduced?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

One of the concerns of those of us involved with it locally is with the ongoing debate about the funding for the entire Underground improvements. Will you commit to treating it as an independent project from the main funding of improvements for the Tube?

• Question by: Samantha Heath
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

I think you can understand that there is substantial public feeling on this particular site and, given that there may be a few controversies regarding the planning application anyway, whether you have got a remit or not, would you be prepared to meet with the local community groups to discuss their concerns?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

On the one hand there is the demand for office and employment space for the city of London and our growth sectors, and on the other hand, there are the concerns of a local community that they might be ridden over by such a development. What will be the general tone that you will adopt in considering such applications because this would certainly be of a scale that would come to you if, as may happen, it has to be resubmitted?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

Am I to understand that you are happy to lead a campaign to Ford, publicly if necessary, to secure continuing car production at Dagenham as I think there are a number of options that have been discussed with the unions and that this would be a very viable way forward for the area?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

I welcome your response that you will publish directions under section 155, but it seems quite critical that you should publicise the priority you are going to give in the initial directions to the Transport for London. Would you confirm that you will present that information to the Assembly in good time prior to July so that we can consider it?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

I think we all agree that transport is the critical area on which the success of your term will be judged and also that the Mayoral campaign was massively dominated by the PPP question. May we hear your thoughts on the sort of directions you plan to give to TfL, prior to the 3rd of July I would hope, so it can hit the ground running?

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

Does the Mayor agree that this is actually part of the Assembly's scrutiny role?

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

That was very useful information but it was not actually the answer to the question. The question begins by asking how does the Mayor intend to set the performance indicators and not necessarily what they will be. And whilst I welcome what the Major has said so far, I wonder if he will discuss with the Assembly, some of whose Members probably have considerable experience of setting local performance indicators, how best to get the most meaningful and effective performance indicators for the role of this Authority?

• Question by: Graham Tope
• Meeting date: 24 May 2000

I hope the Mayor, like me, looks forward to us moving into the 21st century and using not only electronic counting, but electronic voting in the not too distant future. But I wonder whether he shares my view that the count being done by electronic means was not far short of a disaster? I wonder what he has in mind regarding the process and the very long delays and uncertainty about when results would be announced? And I wonder therefore, what steps he feels we can take to ensure that that does not discredit electronic counting forever?