• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

That is fine. I am happy with that. I take your word but it does seem as though what you have done is a sort of desk-based exercise, very internally focused. Here are the people who awarded the contracts doing the investigation. There seems to be a certain amount of independence lacking, if I could put it that way.

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

So you are telling the Assembly that, simply based on the information that you held in your records, on the assumption that all of your records were complete, you were able to come to a conclusion with regard to what Brenda Stern said, that as far as you were concerned there is no case to answer? Would not the obvious thing for you to have done have been to go to the source of the allegations? Is that not an elementary thing to do? Why did you limit your investigation just to the material which you say that you hold?

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

Understood. Then, quite separately, as you also point out in your report, there is a separate police investigation into the Green Badge Taxi School which you are cooperating with?

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

My question follows on from what Tony Arbour and Bob Blackman were saying. You said that you have interviewed existing staff but you have not interviewed staff who no longer work for the organisation, one of whom, Maxine Jones, also made some allegations. There were two whistleblowers: Brenda Stern and Maxine Jones. You have said, 'The review has found that this allegation is incorrect'. In order to reach that conclusion it would seem to me that you would have to talk to both of those two people.

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

Not at this stage. Are you intending to then?

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

So, as far you are concerned, with the exception of the ones that have been referred to the police, is this the end of the matter?

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

Finally in terms of process, you mentioned that you have interviewed or taken evidence of the internal issues within the LDA and the people that currently work for the LDA. How many people are there that have left the LDA that were involved in these particular allegations that have therefore obviously not been interviewed or reviewed?

• 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: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 January 2008

First of all a specific point: there are standard phrases which occur in a number of paragraphs of the review, one that the review has identified weaknesses, in effect, in procedures which are now being addressed and, second, the point is made, I think, on three or four occasions about the way in which the Mayoral advisory role is conducted in respect of programme delivery should be clarified. What specific steps are you taking to carry forward those conclusions?