• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

An awful lot of that is migration and that is people coming because they perceive that the jobs are here. So, intuitively that should not be working. If the jobs are not here, that should not be driving migration. They should actually be going out of London to where the jobs are. There is stronger jobs growth outside London.

• Question by: Murad Qureshi
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

Thank you, Manny, for being comprehensive in your response. If I could just go into some of the specifics. The skills provisions that you touched on - what kind of areas are we talking about in terms of the economy that you think that 30 per cent of Londoners of working age that are workless are best bettered to get into the labour market?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

I have a question on this very topic later, question 136, if your notes help you; still on the same subject of tackling barriers to employment and unemployment. It simply does not ring true to me what you have been saying as to why there is such disparity between London and the rest of the country. If you talk to your colleagues in Liverpool or Newcastle or even single-industry towns like Bradford or Oldham, they will be green with envy with the opportunities we have in London. So, can you return to this question of this gap between employment rates...

• Question by: Angie Bray
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

Well, I am asking you to describe it. Could you perhaps give me your definition?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

Thank you very much. I am pleased for that, because in fact the animal farm there, the petting zoo, which is part of this project, was the single most popular feature in the park that people wanted to see reopened. It was one of the things that made the park a children's park. Andrew Pelling AM: I was very grateful, Chair, for a letter I received from the Chief Executive a month ago reassuring me that the LDA remains very committed to ensuring the best regeneration of this park, although I am still a little bit disconcerted that in many...

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

Well, thank you very much for that very clear commitment. I have to say that the project is extremely popular and there have been two very good consultations in the area, which have raised expectations. The fact that there have been these glitches has caused concern, because nobody in the area wants to see the LDA walking away, because clearly it is a big and difficult project and the community groups in the area have put in a lot of time and effort. Indeed, they are meeting the Mayor this morning about the project. As I said, there have been...

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

Yes, I think it has been consequent on the Licensing Act that has given an opportunity to reduce the administration, so that is very helpful. The other small glitch we had is that there was a planning application, you might not have a note on this, from Capel Manor. Although that horticultural facility was supported during the master planning process by Bromley, there has been the small local planning application which has subsequently gone in, and has been turned down by Bromley. I certainly want to see that resolved. Are you committed to getting that resolved and keeping Capel Manor...

• Question by: Len Duvall OBE
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

But you are not thinking in terms of that process. When does it become a fait accompli that you do not have options? What I need to know is where those decisions are being taken and who by? I think that is what we need to know and others do. I suspect my colleagues in local government might like to know that, even though they are involved in those decisions or part of the discussion, I think.

• Question by: Len Duvall OBE
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

Not you?

• Question by: Len Duvall OBE
• Meeting date: 11 October 2006

Let me stop you there. Can I just stop you there? Hold on. Here again, my understanding is they are delivering the physical side, site buildings and you are now telling me that they have also got the responsibility for a legacy overhang? Their priority is to deliver an on-time, on-budget, project. Is there not something wrong about who is holding that legacy brief?