Search questions

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 08 December 2010

Can I take a different tack with the ticket issue which is very important to sporting fans before transport and getting there. It is the reputational damage risk. The one thing that harmed the Sydney Games was 10,000 Australians, allegedly, applied for free public tickets for one of the triathlon sessions. I want assurances from LOCOG we are not going to have the same incident here and there will be the fair availability of reasonably priced tickets, which we all want?

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

Finally, given that you have milestones and key milestones and a set date to achieve it, would it not have been better to have set up bonus payments rather than contingency sums, given that is going to be the name of the game - getting to key stages at key times at critical points? Clearly we would rather be giving them money for achieving that, rather than spending their time making those claims, which invariably half the building trade does.

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

Sir Roy, if we accept the Government figures as the upper limits to the expenditure on the Olympics, I think the key thing is the management of the contingencies. I am worried that we find ourselves in contracts with contractors who then spend most of their time making claims for the contingencies. They are very generous; about 60% of the build costs. I have certainly had that experience of managing projects myself. What do you have lined up in the procurement arrangements with contractors which make sure they focus and achieve the milestones, rather than putting in the estimators to...

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 25 April 2007

You have mentioned the Cabinet Committees that are keeping an eye on this. Surely the building contract and the legality of that will supersede anything that they can decide about which contingency sums can be drawn from or not.