Can I just ask Mary about the LDA's perspective. The Memorandum of Understanding has been renegotiated. We have heard the assurances today about budgets but we clearly do not know what the position will be when we get the final outturn on everything. Have you got any concerns that the Government might withdraw revenue for support grant, for example, from the GLA to compensate for any cost overruns?
In the event that there are major cost overruns, you have not put this into your risk assessment of the project, that we would lose money as an authority from the Government in direct relation to any cost overruns that take place?
I am just looking at the aspects that we have already talked about, barriers to employment and worklessness and here are 2,000 jobs that are real, actually in place, that are under threat.
Actually `dormant' I understand means that a company is not trading and that is not the same definition which you have just used. Not trading means you are not trading.
OK, can I ask the question another way then? Would you give a grant to a company which is effectively not trading because it has got no business of any size? Would you give it to such an organisation which could hardly be called a company?
Are you confident that procedures are in place to ensure that once funding has been granted, it is actually applied appropriately and is monitored, so that money is applied in accordance with the LDA grant process, or the conditions of the grant?
As you are aware, I have been looking at the grant procedures of the LDA for some months and I have certainly identified about 20 companies that are dormant that you have given money to. I will not read out the list now, but I can certainly supply that to you.