Search questions

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Speaking for all my colleagues, we would like very much to welcome your recognition that target setting can end up being slightly a useless box ticking exercise. We appreciated hearing that from you. On the issue of skilled workforce, obviously we are all concerned to ensure that we get as much up-skilled training as possible to ensure the London workforce can take full advantage of the opportunities offered by the Olympics. One slight query here; is there not also a slight problem that, of course, the building of the Olympic site is also taking place alongside many other major building...

• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Can I rephrase the question, in that case? Will you, as Chief Executive of the ODA, ensure that targets are put in place, that those targets are strictly monitored, and that we as an Assembly are given the figures as to whether or not you are keeping up with the targets at particular milestones?

• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Thank you. My final question is about delivery. A lot of the evidence we have got at scrutiny sessions here is that the LDA and the Learning and Skills Council as being very good at consulting and planning, but not so good on delivery. It is a plea to you to make sure that whoever you put ' whatever group you put together, make sure that you have got implementers rather than planners on that group. Otherwise it will just be talk for the sake of talk.

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

First of all I would like to say from the Green Group, we very much support the Olympics and want it to be a success, and this is the force of our questions. I want to push you again on the whole issue of targets and monitoring, specifically on the legacy aspect of the employment, of the skilling and also of the living wage. There are actually three questions from us' Brian Coleman (Chairman): Let us do one at a time. I am trying to make a point that this is something we care about and something that is going...

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

I am really glad you are doing all that; it is incredibly important. However the fact is that we have to justify to Londoners exactly why the Olympics is good for them because we have to justify the increase in the council tax that Londoners are paying. We need these figures. I understand about targets and how this takes up a huge amount of time to monitor and so on, but we are going to have to have these figures. We will keep asking for them.

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Can I just take you back? I was in here when we were all happy on the day of the bid. Clearly, at the heart of this bid was the benefit for East London and we have been joined by the stars of the future from East London. (Brian Coleman (Chairman): I think you are referring to Malmesbury Primary School from the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, who arrived just too late to see the earlier outburst which would have fitted very well, I suspect, with a primary school class.) My question relates to them, David. I am sure if...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Thank you for that. It is a bit confusing, I think, certainly because there are all sorts of budgets running around as well as your own and the outstanding costs to the LDA. The £2.375 billion figure which was cited as being the `guesstimate' for the infrastructure costs is probably not a firm figure and if anything ' and you obviously cannot commit yourselves to say what it will be ' you are saying it is not a firm figure and costs could go higher than that. Therefore Vincent Cable, who quoted you in that debate in Westminster Hall not...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Thank you. Clearly this is an ongoing situation and we have not reached that point yet where we can have an absolutely clear figure; I appreciate that. Obviously we are hoping that you will keep us up to date as you continue. Just a final question; I think we understood from comments made by Richard Caborn MP {Minister of State (Sport))about the LOCOG budget that that had to be raised because of inflationary costs. I wonder whether that is going to be a significant factor in your `guesstimates' 'inflation, which who knows what it might be going up to '...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Angie Bray (AM): You can appreciate, of course, that Londoners might well be interested in having some kind of comfort on this. Clearly people can come along and say `Yes, actually, if we spend a bit more now we can get a better a legacy'. There has to come a point when you say we cannot go on concerning ourselves about legacy if it is actually going to mean that the costs continue to rise. I wondered if there was any kind of comfort there that you could offer Londoners at this stage?

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 14 June 2006

Thank you. Mr Higgins, I am actually interested in the finances from a different angle, from the LOCOG angle. I assume the project management side is something you will be on top of as professionals. I just think, actually, on the income side there may have been one or two opportunities you may have missed. I mean the TV revenue side, for example, whilst it goes through LOCOG it sounds as though it is going to be a set amount rather than a set percentage. It sounds as though the next Olympics straight after the Beijing one is actually a...