Search questions

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

But none of the organisations which have recieved grants?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

Can you confirm then that the report that was issued is substantially, other than maybe a few housekeeping issues that might have emerged, the one that was presented to the Board on the Friday morning? I believe that is the case.

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

Has he given you a timescale for what he is going to do or how he is going to do anything?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

I do not have any problem with the entirety. Just to clarify ' I think this has been clarified fairly well ' but the question of referrals to the police is because, when serious allegations are made ' and of course people making serious allegations have a serious responsibility to reflect on the seriousness of the allegations they are making ' the LDA is not a detective agency itself. You can confirm that it is not a detective agency?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

It would be premature, would it not?

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

You have mentioned, Andrew, that this is your review. I want to be absolutely clear what the status of the District Auditor is in it now. Have you asked the District Auditor to do any further work or investigations?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

I might as well declare that I was the Chair of the Audit Committee of the LDA for a couple of years. I am very happy for that to be a matter of record as well; we did some very good work there. The District Audit is an independent service. There are of course two sides to this because politicians the world over use it as a foil for their political battles, but anyone in this Chamber, or indeed any member of the public, has a perfect right to contact the District Audit Service and to ask them to look...

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 13 October 2004

Thank you for that answer, but you will recall that one of the issues that was raised at the five-borough planning meeting was the legacy. Really my question is about what guarantees we are building in to ensure that facilities that are built really can have the revenue in order that they can carry on, and we are not left in a position with so-called `white elephants- around the place.

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 13 October 2004

Can I just press you: when you say "sign off" and "your assurance," we hear this, and people in Hackney and in east London have heard this time and time again, so can you just dig deeper? What do you mean? What guarantees are there that there will be a revenue stream and that these jobs that are created will stay local? I do not get a sense of what is happening and who is going to be leading. Will the LDA be leading on behalf of the Mayor to ensure that the legacy is longer than the Games?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 13 October 2004

The comments about Crystal Palace are welcome, but perhaps the Mayor would deal with this: do you not understand that residents of Bromley and Bexley feel aggrieved? Although safeguarding of Crystal Palace is good, they are likely to receive very little direct benefit in legacy terms, but are expected to contribute through their council tax for a number of years, whereas residents of areas outside London, which may have Olympic sites as firm parts of the bid, are not expected to contribute. What means could be achieved to seek greater equity for the residents of Bexley and Bromley on that...