Search questions

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

I have another question about your style as a `bus nut'. Certainly as far as Lewisham goes, I think the service on route 436 has improved infinitely since tatty, clapped-out old Routemasters were replaced by new `bendy' buses. I was a bit concerned by the Mayor's comments at People's Question Time the other week that basically `bendy' buses were on trial and we could see them disappear. Whilst I accept that they are not suitable for all routes and it is only a very small number of routes that they are suitable for, do you seriously think there is a...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

Absolutely. Given all those advantages you have spelt out and the very positive customer feedback that you have had on route 29, it is pretty unimaginable that `bendy' buses disappear from the streets of London, is it not?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

I fully understand the position you are in at the moment with the public inquiry, but that inquiry had to be suspended because the traffic counts in Bexley on which TfL's modelling was based turned out to flawed. As you say, they had to be revised, and then recently it emerged that TfL's new traffic model continued to assume that the Congestion Charge would only be £5 when in fact it had gone up to £8 and you had forgotten to include that in your modelling. Your regeneration evidence says that the bridge will create jobs, yet the traffic model...

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

): I fully understand that you cannot pre-empt every single issue, but surely TfL should be able to remember the price of their own Congestion Charge, which they set, when they are giving evidence to a public inquiry? You say that is a complete red herring, but the traffic modelling figures for Bexley have shown already that very small changes in assumptions can lead to very significant effects. Consequently, are you going to run that modelling again based on the correct price for Congestion Charging rather than the £5 assumption that you made?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

They are providing very good value for money, are they not?

• Reference: 2006/0035-1
• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

Are you happy with the quality of TfL's evidence to the Thames Gateway Bridge Inquiry?

• Reference: 2006/0036-1
• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

How much expenditure and how many new cameras were originally proposed in the first draft of the 2006/2007 Operational Case of the London Safety Camera Partnership submitted to the Department for Transport? How much expenditure and how many new cameras were agreed with Government in the final 2006/2007 Operational Case?

• Reference: 2006/0037-1
• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

Have you drawn up plans to bridge the gap between the EU's requirements on air quality targets and what can be achieved through current plans, including the LEZ proposal?

• Reference: 2006/0038-1
• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

Please could you specify which projects from the Mayor's 100 Public Spaces Programme TfL has supported in the years 04/05 and 05/06, and which projects it expects to support in 06/07 and 07/08? Please could you also give details of the sums spent on, or committed to, each project specified?

• Reference: 2006/0039-1
• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 15 March 2006

Do you agree that closing selected roads to traffic can help make London a more attractive city for residents and visitors whilst also boosting walking and cycling? What work has TfL done (alone or with the boroughs) to identify streets which would be suitable for closing to traffic, either permanently or temporarily, for example on Sundays?