• Reference: 2008/1136
• Question by: Dee Doocey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

Has the venue for the equestrian events in 2012 been confirmed as Greenwich Park? If so, can you confirm for what periods the park, or sections of the park, will need to be closed to the public for whatever reason?

• Reference: 2008/1135
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

Why was the agreement with the London Health Observatory described in DD11 approved retrospectively?

• Reference: 2008/1134
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

DD8 states that a grant of £7,000 will be given to the Refugee Society in support of the 'Celebrating Sanctuary' event. Could you please provide a copy of the grant agreement with the Refugee Society and give a list of any objectives or performance targets associated with this funding?

• Reference: 2008/1133
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

According to DD1 £15,000 of the cost of producing the 2008 London Election report will come from either the 2007/08 or 2008/09 DMAG budget. Why is funding from this budget being used as opposed to funding from the elections budget?

• Reference: 2008/1132
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

According to MD8 £283,000 of the cost of RISE festival and related events will be met by sponsorship income currently being sought. If there is an underachievement in sponsorship income will the GLA be required to provide supplementary funding above the £305,000 budgeted? Are contingency funds available for this eventuality?

• Reference: 2008/1131
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

In your answer to my question 844/2008 you stated that you had no objection to my suggestions of a) Showing the reason for each reported payment to the GLA not just who they are paid to b) Breaking down the total reported payment to an organisation into each separate payment for each separate contract or grant payment and advised that you would be asking officers 'to assess the feasibility and cost of including such extra information, including any legal obstacles that may need to be taken into consideration.' Could you please update me on your discussions with officers and whether...

• Reference: 2008/1130
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

According to your answer to question 804/2008 'There are currently a number of consultants who are being paid to support the transition process, but it is not intended that the fees for these individuals will be made public.' However, your manifesto stated that: 'We propose to lower the threshold at which GLA expenditure to suppliers must be reported, from £4,000 to £1,000.' Assuming the transition consultants are paid a reasonable amount for their work as suppliers how do you explain the contradiction between these two statements?

• Reference: 2008/1129
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

The head of Legal and Procurement at the GLA advised a BMAC meeting on the 4th of June that Mr. Malthouse and yourself have been advised that he cannot scrutinise any of the policy developments that he has been given responsibility for as a deputy Mayor. Will Mr. Malthouse then absent himself from any Assembly meetings on policing or any meetings about any of the other topics in his portfolio?

• Reference: 2008/1127
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

Can you please give a list of which section 67 staff you have appointed who will have line manager responsibilities over GLA staff and which staff they will line manage?

• Reference: 2008/1125
• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 18 June 2008

According to your manifesto and campaign press releases you want Mayor's advisors to be 'subject to the same levels of accountability that elected politicians are' and to have a 'Clearly defined role'. With that in mind can you provide the Assembly with a report on the process by which these staff were appointed, given that there was no competitive interview process?