Wrong! Almost the opposite is true.

Ken Livingstone held fares down for as long as he could get away with it even
though Bob Kiley told the relevant Parliamentary Committee that the subsidy
on buses was going through the roof and had reached a £billion a year, a
third of TfL's then annual budget. Livingstone, the archetypal Socialist
parasite, maintained that investment in big infrastructure should come from
grants from Central Government and not from TfL's budget. This was one the
points Steve Norris made during his unsuccessful campaigns to become Mayor.
Livingstone has not changed his tune and he still sings the same old song
every Saturday morning on LBC.

Boris Johnson, being a different brand of parasite and using his office merely
as a springboard to leadership of the Tories, is eager to reduce the subsidy but
not in order to increase investment. (What new projects has Boris Johnson
initiated? Almost everything completed during his term was started by Livingstone.)

Johnson's agenda is to demonstrate to the Tory faithful that he is far more effective
than George Osborne at cutting expenditure and reducing debt without
seriously damaging services. So Johnson is using the money saved to pay off
the debt. (This was one of the points Livingstone made during the last Mayoral
election. Livingstone said he would use the saved money to reduce fares.)

Neither of these two wastrels has indicated there is a link between fare levels and investment.

As for the quality of services, I suggest it may be more due to management
and the suspiciously high costs of every project. The more that is spent on
existing projects, the less there will be for other important work.