Search questions

• Question by: Navin Shah
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Can you confirm that you have sufficient contingency funding and that will cover any slippage or any delays in programme or additional costs and that, therefore, there will be no requirement for building from the public purse or any other source?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Hopefully it creates one or two hostages to fortune and helps to raise the expectations on your performance even higher. My other question is about legacy. I do not want to steal Dee Doocey's question but it is this; it seems to me one of the biggest areas of risk is things that do not really have a proper parent so issues of legacy, such as what happens with the Stadium afterwards. If you are going for your mythical gong at the end of the Olympics it does not really matter to you what happens to the Stadium afterwards, particularly...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

A lot of people will look to their local councillors as being people to protect their interests. How do you see that working? I know the local five boroughs have, more or less, agreed a single position on the Olympics and how they work with it. Do you have any problems with any of their requests and proposals?

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

Sorry, it is not about percentages. It is just: are you saying that there is a commitment and that we will not see boards made up of white men in suits?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

I have a feeling that if Angie (Bray) were Mayor of London, she might have problems with it, as well. Leaving that flippant comment to one side, do you see, for example, London Citizens having a continuing involvement with the Olympics?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

It would be very helpful for everyone if those relationships were understood, so that if the DCMS Select Committee makes a point, and the Assembly contradicts it and has a different perspective, there is a coherent response to that, and we understand how the hierarchy works, and how the different interests are being responded to and protected and so on. This could become a rather bureaucratic conversation, but some serious work needs to take place outside of meetings like this. Otherwise, we are going to have lots of very interesting headlines, but maybe not a lot of light shed on...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

Some months ago, in Mary's (Reilly) absence, I had the privilege, as vice chair of the LDA, to be a co-signatory with you of a letter to London Citizens. They are a particular pressure group on behalf of a number of faith groups, in particular. A number of comments were made to them about housing, about training, and so on. How do you see that being followed through in the coming months and years?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

Thank you for that. Clearly, it is a bit like the situation with local businesses, that although there may be a range of formal commitments which are very well detailed and set down, individual people and interest groups might have difficulty understanding how they get into the structure of the Olympics. Say your road is stopped up, because there is some work taking place, or some development happens at the end of your street for the Olympics, and you do not really understand who to go to, or why it is happening. How is that mechanism going to work?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

One final question, and I can ask this by posing a possible answer, I suppose: who should hold the Olympics to account? Potentially, the Olympics board holds it to account; the ODA holds it to account; the LDA holds it to account; and the London Assembly and each of the individual boroughs might consider they have to. There is a Select Committee of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) which might want to, as well. Is there potentially a real messy soup of accountability, out of which everyone will want a soundbite, but no one will actually wrestle...

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 08 September 2005

It is just a quick one following on from the issues John (Biggs) has raised. This is about representation and perception. The ethnic diversity of London was, quite rightly, acknowledged within the bid, and our presentation team and the inclusion of the athletes made the work to date, if you like, ethnically representative. It does, however, concern me that if you look at the people now lining up to sit in the seats of power ' the ODA, LOCOG, the Olympic Board ' all I expect to see is white men in suits. Are you as concerned as I that...