• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

What is the timeframe, and where can I get that information from?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

On the issue of David Higgins' commitment, do you agree with his comments, as ODA Chief Executive, that the contract you signed with London Citizens on the Living Wage does not actually apply to the ODA, because the ODA did not exist when the letter was signed?

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Can I just ask a follow-up then. You talked about the London Skills Board. Can you give us an assurance that any activities coming out of this body will add to the work that is going on? I am thinking particularly of one of my boroughs, Waltham Forest, and there is a great programme there with the LDA. What people would want to see is additional to that, rather than a new wave. Will this be the way forward that you will be steering this board?

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

That is the situation regarding the ODA and the GLA, because those are public bodies, and we understand the sensitivities and all the legal hurdles and so on, but LOCOG is a private company. It is not subject to the same legal restrictions as public bodies. So, are you concerned by Seb Coe's (Chair of LOCOG) statement that payment of the Living Wage at LOCOG - where you recognise yourself low pay is far more of a pressing issue, because they will be dealing with catering, cleaning and all those traditionally low-paid areas - will be a consideration but not...

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Before I bring Richard (Barnes) in, LOCOG is certainly a private company for the purposes of Freedom of Information, but pursuing Darren's (Johnson) point, would you be able, Mr Mayor, to let the Assembly have sight of the advice as to the legal hurdles to which Darren (Johnson) was referring? He said he understood. I am not sure that he understood in a technical sense, he just took the point. Clearly this is a matter of interest to the whole Assembly.

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Mr Mayor, the other aspect of Darren's [Johnson] question is about local employment. Now, I have recently been appointed a member of the CRE (Commission for Racial Equality) for this body, and attended a meeting there last week. They are still consulting about equalities procurement, and will not be finished until January. I have spoken to City & Guilds and another number of organisations which provide training. I cannot seem to identify, anywhere, a critical path analysis of the skills required and the timeframe for those skills. When I talk to the colleges, they tell me that it takes six...

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

Is that Londoners who already have the skill sets that are needed to fulfil those jobs, or are you actually looking for local employment to have a regeneration impact on the five Olympic boroughs? I really do get the sense that if you are in work, you are working for a company, and you have got skills, you will get a job there, perhaps higher paid than Darren (Johnson) expects, but if you are unemployed, you will remain unemployed, unless you take a labouring job.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

They are not subject to the same legal constraints. I am sure that they can go away and get some legal advice and make a strong, absolutely cast-iron commitment to delivering a Living Wage. They should be doing that, because it is LOCOG; They have far more responsibility in this area than any other part of the Olympic family, in terms of making sure that we do not have a low-pay Olympics.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 18 November 2006

But you have given a clear commitment.

• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 13 September 2006

Thank you, Mr Mayor. The point is this 'balanced preamble' as you call it is not balanced. There are seven lines here, which lead the question in a particular way; why not just ask the question: 'Do you agree or disagree that people should be discouraged from using large SUVs in London?' By putting in a preamble which foreshadows the answer you want, it actually means that you are lacking confidence in just simply asking the question.