• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

You told us in your initial response that the IOC was quite clear what the future use of this stadium was going to be. How can it possibly be that you even entered into any discussions at all with West Ham if the future of the stadium is going to be as an athletics stadium?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

In summary, is football in or football out?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

When did those negotiations terminate?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

You told us, again in an earlier response, that you have been negotiating with community groups and so on. Are you really telling the Assembly and the people of London that a viable future for the stadium as an athletics venue can be provided on the basis of full time use by local community groups, without a substantial subsidy from something like a premier league football club?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

I am interested to hear you say that all of that was agreed in the summer, because on 24 October you told the Cultural Committee here, `If we can get football clubs in there to help mitigate the operating costs, we will certainly be open to that'. Richard Caborn (Minister for Sport), on 21 October, said in the Guardian, `There is very serious negotiation going on between West Ham and the Olympic Authorities about the stadium'. Are you ruling football in or football out?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

If you were to receive a number of written questions from the Assembly asking you to confirm or otherwise some of the more detailed points which seem to be squirming out in the press, would you be happy to receive those? Perhaps happy is not the right word.

• Question by: Damian Hockney
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

Sir Roy, you said just now about being on track, but one of the most key elements of being on track is the budget. Mr Higgins, when you came to us in June, I said to you, and I quote, `In the next six to nine months there are likely to be problems. Will we have the same cooperation in flagging up any problems which occur; the possibility of any delays and, most importantly, the cost implications?' When you came to us you talked about everything being very good and I pointed out that I thought it was a honeymoon...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

My final question is about money. Is there anything we need to know about the financial settlement associated with the departure of Mr Lemley? He was on a contract of something like £250,000 a year, maybe it was more than that.

• Question by: Bob Blackman
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

I understand that. My concern here is that the credibility of the organisation is being challenged; first by the departure of Jack Lemley, then by Lord Rogers, and allegedly by the Mayor as well. That tends to suggest that there are serious problems undermining the whole organisation

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 15 November 2006

I understand. Was there any payment made to Mr Lemley in relation to the termination of his position?