• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

I will be very quick, because Lynne (Featherstone) has covered some of the points that I wanted to raise anyway. But how do we ensure that the UDC is not just about circumventing the local democratic process and that we do not sideline the input from the boroughs and from the local communities below that?

• Question by: Lynne Featherstone
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

Yes

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

Thank you. The question is clearly about how you manage and, indeed, reconcile these multiple accountabilities: to central government for the money; to the GLA for the policy framework, and - you did not touch on this - to what is meant to be a business-led board, who presumably have a role, not just to implement what others tell them but to bring something to the party. In relation to central government, there is not just the DTI accountability, there is the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) for tourism money, and there is the Office of the Deputy...

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

In relation to the mayoral interventions, either directly or through advisors, at the Economic and Social Development Committee you said that there had never been a time when you had actually refused a request. There had been vigorous discussions, but the answer had never been `no'.

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

The thesis behind this question is that the Assembly has a statutory responsibility to hold the LDA to account, but you are not a creature of regional government; there are these multiple accountabilities. If we are to do our job in holding you to account effectively, we need to see how these conflicts are working, and we talked offline about the difficulty of, for example, making available publicly a Government Office for London quarterly assessment of you. I think we need to explore further how to see that relationship working better with government. Moving on to the second question relating...

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

My question is on joined-up government and all these relationships with the ODPM, the DCMS, the DTI, GOL and all the rest of it. Did anybody inform you of the Government's new scheme to move some 80,000 jobs out of London? In a sense, there is a contradiction between the long-term plan that London is going to increase, and the Government actually trying to cut down the increase by moving jobs out of London. Was there any consultation with the LDA on this?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

I want to give you an opportunity in explaining what drives the LDA's agenda, to explain what is wrong with the argument that says you are the `Mayor's chequebook" and how the relationship between your business plan and unforeseen events is managed so that the LDA"s resources are used to maximise opportunities such as the Olympics or the Ford decision to stop manufacturing.

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 17 March 2004

Can I recommend that you read what the business community said when it came to the Budget Committee here on 13 January because there was some very critical comment there about the way the business community feels. But what I want to ask you to do is to be more public going forward in terms of where requests are made and refusals are offered up. If you can show us where you are saying `no" rather than reconciling everything behind the scenes, then I think it is easier for us and indeed, the whole of London, to see how these...