• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Thank you, Chair. I would have thought one of the greatest risks that you actually run is the security of the site during build and, indeed, during the Games itself. Are you content that the structure, where you have got Ian Johnson now heading security, I assume within the Park? I am not sure if he has got responsibility for all the 134 sites plus the free to view Games. You have got him there. You have got the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) through Chris Allison [Assistant Commissioner, Central Operations, Metropolitan Police Service] and the public order with the responsibility...

• 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: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Thank you very much. I am very glad to hear that you have made progress on that because it is incredibly important. Congratulations on being on time and on budget. That is pretty amazing and I am sure we are all happy about that. One of the next steps that you could do, in fact, with the Living Wage, is to have accreditation from London Citizens and I gather that organisations like the London Development Agency (LDA) already do have that. I wondered if you would take that next step and get accreditation and then, perhaps, you could also work...

• Question by: Richard Barnbrook
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

): I am happy to hear that we are actually on track with this and so the rumours I have been hearing that we are six to eight months behind have obviously been expelled by yourselves by saying we are actually on track, financially and work-wise. One thing I do have a concern with - and I have to follow other Members here - is the Living Wage or at least working wage of the London weighting. What I would like to have spelt out clearly is you are suggesting, by this time, October 2010, there will be 10,000 workers...

• Question by: Richard Tracey
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Could I take up one point with you on the whole relative costs of salaries and so on? Mr Higgins, you, I think, serve with seven other directors on the ODA, receiving pretty substantial salaries. Indeed, I believe you, this last year, did forego half of your bonus until 2012. Would it be reasonable for you and your fellow directors to consider foregoing your complete bonus until you have finished the job, and then receive whatever you are entitled to, through the success you have achieved?

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Murad Qureshi (AM): I just want to continue on Richard Tracey's theme, actually, and I think it is a major reputational risk for the ODA, quite honestly, these whole bonuses that you have been giving yourselves. I just want to be clear; how can the ODA possibly justify raking in £2.6 million in salaries and bonuses when there is a funding shortfall for the Olympic sports' venues themselves, and the land assembly in particular?

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 21 October 2009

Mr Armitt, let us just get this straight. You approved Mr Higgins' package which is £641,000 a year, but your own package is £250,000. That is part time isn't it?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 18 March 2009

I very, very much welcome this change in direction and that you are now coming forward with some exciting new plans for the Board meeting tomorrow, looking at free home insulation scheme. It was only back on 6 January 2009, Peter, that you were telling me at the Assembly's Budget and Performance Committee that you did not see any future for the LDA in terms of domestic home insulation and green homes work. Have you changed your mind or has your mind been changed for you?

• Question by: Richard Tracey
• Meeting date: 18 March 2009

Mr McGrath, you sound to me really rather uncomfortable in this position over the Olympics. Is that a fair description? Are you feeling uncomfortable and really rather insecure about it all?

• Question by: Andrew Boff
• Meeting date: 18 March 2009

Mr McGrath, you have said that the technique that you are going to use to deal with the fairly obvious shortfall that there would be on capital receipts that have been fed into the calculations for the Olympic Development that you would lengthen the timescales. Can we be assured that that is the only technique that you will be using and we will not try to make up any shortfall by trying to get capital receipts from those areas of the Olympic development that are not currently scheduled to be sold off?