• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

You are not saying that the commitment to support up to the tune of £250,000 would have been given without your knowledge, are you?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

You would know whether you were committed.

• Question by: Darren Johnson
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

Forget about those way off the mark

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

I suspect it was done to give some commitment to the people of the Forum that it was likely to happen, but I am sure we would have told them that it would depend on my re-election for the whole project to be firmed up. Bear in mind that in the run-up to an election and you are trying to clear your desk before campaigning, there is a lot to rustle up at the last minute.

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

From our point of view, it was a very welcome gathering; they were welcomed in London and it was a very interesting political debate. Some views we would agree with, and some views we would vehemently disagree with. The issue is whether or not this was GLA money subsidising an essentially political meeting, not a meeting that was helping the GLA to achieve something. I was trying to get to what advice you have, and on what basis do you make these decisions?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

The commitment is a bit different. Moving on to the Mayor's approval form of 4 May 2004, you gave a contribution of £150,000 and that form was signed six days after the last Mayor's Question Time prior to the commencement of the election, which meant it would not be reported to the Assembly until after the election. Was that deliberate?

• Question by: Jennette Arnold OBE
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

Apart from what we have heard this morning, and leaving aside the mockery and the clear demonstration by some members positioned opposite me that they really cannot see London beyond the boundaries of their constituency, would you agree that one of the positive spin-offs of holding the ESF in London was that 150 delegates from about 20 countries, members of the European local government authorities, met in this chamber to discuss and share dialogue on their work across the same issues that were discussed in the ESF, the central issues about safety, living in a diverse community, and how we...

• Question by: Damian Hockney
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

): Can you explain how £396,000 worth of travel is spun as being £40,000 in value? It is unacceptable, in my view, to have given free travel to everyone there. That is my opinion, but I am sure it is the opinion of others here. Can you explain describing it as £40,000 when it actually had a face value of £396,000?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

Tomorrow, the Budget Committee will be looking in much more detail at some of the issues that have been raised in terms of the Mayoral approval forms and the value for money - it is a lot of money, and we want to look at what Londoners have got back. I want to focus on the dividing line in the decision-making process between the proper spending of public money to further the core aims of the GLA and the improper intervention in party political debate and the political process. Can I take you back to what you said in answer...

• Question by: Brian Coleman
• Meeting date: 20 October 2004

Can we bring it back to the issue of the ESF?