Question: Ken Livingstone sacked you from the Board of Transport for London because of what he said were your gratuitous attacks on the TfL and because your business interests were making your position untenable. How did you feel when you found out you got the sack?

Steve Norris: Entirely unmoved on the grounds that I thought he was quite right. I had indeed been attacking him and whilst I wouldn't describe the attacks as gratuitous, they were certainly intentional. I'm afraid whilst Ken Livingstone and I share a great deal of good will about London it was clear to me that good will is not enough. I thought he was wrong about the tube, I thought he was wrong about congestion charging, I thought he was wrong about cycling and walking, I thought he was wrong about the priorities that he set for TfL, indeed there was very little that, it seemed to me, he and I agreed on and therefore whilst we remain on the best possible terms personally, I'm afraid the separation of our roles was frankly inevitable.

Question: So your business interests weren't an issue at all?

Steve Norris: Oh you must ask yourself why, if Ken was suddenly concerned about my business interests, he had not been when he appointed me to the job in 2000. The reality is that I have always earned my living in the transport world, Ken knew that and indeed he accepted it but when it became convenient for him to find a hook on which to hang my resignation, he chose, as ever, to use the idea that I was merely a slave of capitalism. This is very very much the Livingstone way of dealing with things but I'm afraid to say I don't honestly think it cuts any ice with most people.

Question: The government looks like it might reconsider PPP, so was Ken right on the tube after all?

Steve Norris: I don't think there's the slightest sign that the government is reconsidering PPP. People have been invited by Ken to draw the most extraordinary conclusions from what was in fact a perfectly straight forward exchange between the select committee and Mr Byers. What Mr Byers said, quite properly, was that the PPP process would be subject to due diligence by his department. He was absolutely right to say that, it's entirely proper, but what he never suggested was that there was actually a plan B. And I think that most people know that coming off the back of the debacle of Railtrack, if Mr Byers were now to abort the PPP, the damage that that would do to the government's credibility as a public finance player would be so great that Mr Byers is unlikely to want to go down that road. I think Mr Livingstone is quite wrong to assume that Stephen Byers' perfectly correct and sensible comments about the way that the PPP will be judged had anything to do with re thinking it, that's simply not the case.

Question: Do you think PPP is a very strong marker post for business attitudes to Labour?

Steve Norris: I can tell you this - a great many business people were extremely concerned about what happened during the Railtrack debacle. What they saw, whatever Mr Byers may think of it, was effectively nationalisation without compensation, and they need reassurance that the government is still capable of being dealt with seriously as far as the private sector is concerned. The PPP has been going for 5 years now, the contractors collectively have probably spent the thick end of £200 million on preparing their bids and getting themselves to the state that they're in now. If Mr Byers now aborts that process then the damage that he will do to the process of public and private co-operation - the co-operation between the private sector and government in so many fields, not just infrastructure and rail, but healthcare, education and all the other fields in which PFI credits are evolved, would be enormous. I don't think the government wants to go down that road.

Question: You said Ken Livingstone made a mess of congestion charges - why?

Steve Norris: Well because for example, he has not thought through the enforcement, he has not thought through the effects of the cordoned area that he outlined because he hasn't taken proper account of the diversion of traffic onto 'rat runs' which will actually produce more pollution rather than less, he initially said it was about raising revenue but now admits no revenue will actually be raised of any consequence so he has now changed his tune and said it's about pollution. The trouble with that is that all evidence suggests that pollution will actually get worse, he has not thought through the exemptions, some of his closest supporters like the Fire Brigades Union are among the people who are now most outraged at the fact that they'll be charged £5 a day after tax to travel to work to do their essential work for Londoners. In short this is a very bodged exercise which fails the crucial test that it doesn't put in place the kind of public transport that's needed before you introduce a congestion charging system like this in London.

Question: Do you suspect it might not get through this time round?

Steve Norris: No I'd go further than saying I suspect it. I note that a few days ago Bob Kiley apparently warned Ken that the pace at which congestion charging was currently advancing was such that it was almost certain to lose him the next mayoral election. I believe that it is now certain that Ken will rely on the device of a public inquiry to make sure that congestion charging does not appear until at least after the next mayoral election in May 2004. And I think that's a vain attempt to keep the issue live in front of Londoners when in reality it's a great admission of failure.

Question: What effect has September 11 had on London?

Steve Norris: Well regrettably September 11 has had a significant effect on London, particularly of course in the most obvious way imaginable, which is that many fewer of our long range visitors both from the Pacific rim and America have actually arrived here. Some of the biggest spenders are our visitors from the Pacific rim and the Americas and therefore there has been a significant downturn in the upper end of our hotel traffic and our tourism traffic as a result. I entirely approve of what Ken is doing in trying to stimulate the idea that London is a place that you can come to enjoy the pre Christmas shopping and indeed the pre Christmas festivities. I think he's doing exactly the right thing, but there's no doubt that the effect of September 11 has been serious.

Question: It's been a bad year for you - sacked by Ken Livingstone and Iain Duncan Smith. Were you surprised Iain Duncan Smith didn't reinstate you as Vice Chairman of the Party?

Steve Norris: It's quite extraordinary how if it is a bad year, I feel so good about it. I personally have had a magnificent year and I've never been more pleased with the progress that my own business has made. As to being the only man to say that he had a P45 from Iain Duncan Smith and Ken Livingstone in the same year, that is a badge I wear with considerable pride.

Question: When you were Vice Chairman of the Party, how successful were you at attracting young and ethnic minorities to the Conservative Party?

Steve Norris: It was beginning to take shape. I don't want to claim that we had yet actually succeeded as I would have liked us to have done, but I do think that we were on the right track and that we were doing the right thing.

Whether Iain Duncan Smith will yet be able to achieve that, is something that only time will tell. But that's a decision for him, I don't have any animosity towards Mr Duncan Smith, I wish him well, I think he has a rather considerable mountain to climb but I hope he will be able to do so. He'll have my support in doing so because he tells me he wants to drag the Party back to the mainstream, that's exactly where I think it has to be. I wish him every success - as long as he does succeed, he'll have my entire support in doing so.

Question: When we last talked last year, you mentioned that you thought the Conservative party is too monochrome- do you believe this is still the case?

Steve Norris: Oh it is certainly still the case at this moment, that is as we approach Christmas 2001. Iain Duncan Smith has appointed three ethnic minority advisors to Central Office, that's extremely good, he's put down a marker as far as the Monday Club is concerned, that's also extremely good, and he's indicated that he does understand that the Party has to be less monochrome not just in terms of ethnic minorities but also in terms of the gender split between women and men as candidates and the whole way the Party looks at recruiting successful candidates for the future. But all of that is, in effect, for the future in terms of how he's able to deliver it. All I know is that at this moment he's asking the right question - only time will tell whether he's actually capable of delivering the right answers as well.

Question: Do you believe the Liberal Democrats are a serious threat to the Conservatives and is it a threat that the Conservatives understand fully?

Steve Norris: I'm not sure that they are and I'll tell you why - it's very clear to me, and to most thinking Conservatives that the Liberals are actually to the Left of the Labour Party. Ironically, what that means is that those people who may feel that the Conservative Party are too right wing, are more likely to find a haven in the Labour Party than they are with the Lib Dems.

But actually, I think that the challenge for the Conservatives is not to think in terms of where the people might go, but to think about not only retaining the 8.6 million people who voted Conservative in 2001 but addressing the 14.3 million who voted for the Tories in 1992. And the task is not just, as I say, to retain those we've already got, but to go and get some of the people we've lost over the last decade. Now to do that, I don't think that you move the Party in philosophical terms to the right, what I think actually you have to do is to stay where you are on the sensible middle ground of right-of-centre politics, which is where the Conservative Party has traditionally been, and then look to present yourself as a more competent alternative to Labour. That is what the Tories have got to do, and that is the real challenge that Mr Duncan Smith has to face.

Question: How long are people going to wait for this to take place?

Steve Norris: Well they'll certainly wait longer than now if you see what I mean. Mr Blair is currently enjoying all of the prestige and popularity that goes with being a war leader, but that will change. I'll just remind people that in the year of the Gulf War, President George Bush Senior had approval ratings in the 80 per cent plus bracket. He still lost the presidential election a year later. So all I will say is that I don't assume that because Mr Blair is very popular now, he has to stay very popular for the whole of the 5 year Parliament. I think that whilst Mr Blair will almost certainly be seen to have failed in terms of delivering public services, the real challenge for the Conservatives is not only to articulate how they would manage the public services better than government, but also to show that they are a more competent alternative than the government we currently have. Now I don't think they've been capable of doing that so far, the great challenge is to show that they can do that in the future.

Question: Would you be keen to return to Central Office in some kind of capacity to do that?

Steve Norris: I've always made it clear that I'd be very happy to help in any way that I could. I don't bear any ill will in terms of my no longer being formally associated with Central Office, Mr Duncan Smith has to reward his friends and nobody gave him more of a kicking during the election than I did, and therefore I've not the slightest concern that he might not wish immediately to avail himself of my services. But ultimately I hope that the Tories will try to embrace all of the people in the party who might actually move the Party's agenda forward, and if that includes me, well I'll be very happy to play my part.

Question: If there was an election for London Mayor today would it be better for you to compete as a Conservative candidate or an independent candidate?

Steve Norris: Overwhelmingly as a Conservative candidate, not least because I don't believe we're yet ready for independence. I believe that you can be both a candidate who is a strong supporter of the Conservative Party and a candidate who at the same time makes it clear that he's going to make his own decisions and will not be looking to Conservative Central Office for confirmation of them.

Question: So an independently minded Conservative?

Steve Norris: Exactly - that's precisely the point, and that's actually the position I took last time. I've always made it clear that I would vote for, and indeed I did vote for William Hague, I've always made it clear that I would vote for Mr Duncan Smith and my Conservative candidate at the general election, but that does not mean that I would take my lead from the Conservative Party when it came to constructing a mayoral agenda. I believe that Londoners expect me to be looking after their interests first, second and third and how I vote is actually not desperately important in that context - it's how I deliver for Londoners that they will actually be looking for.