What a laugh if you take it as a funny joke, but actually it is really quite important constitutionally. We are here to scrutinise the work of the Mayor and the money you are spending, Londoners' money, and yet you are refusing to give us this information. Can you have an avowed support for open Government when this flies in the face of that? Mike has asked what you are trying to hide. When you say you are still in detailed discussion about safety on the night and finessing the finances that does worry me. You talk about the action not actually happening. You have let a contract of £1 million and I think it is reasonable, and our legal duty in fact, to ask that we receive that.
The other point I want to ask is who do you think should decide what is Mayoral advice. We are hearing that it is your own advisers, including some political appointees, who can decide and rule on what is Mayoral advice and what you therefore cannot share with us. It seems to me that ought to be part of the Monitoring Officer's role and not something that is in the heart of your office, because that is counter to the whole spirit of effective and open scrutiny. Can you answer those two questions that I have just asked? Why we cannot have this, because you have let the contract, that action has happened, and what your view is about Mayoral advice and who should rule on that?