London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Bill

I beg to disagree with the noble Baroness on Amendment No. 2, although I am well aware of her significant knowledge and understanding of the working of the London Assembly—we will learn more about her depth of knowledge on these matters as we proceed, I am sure. The reason for my disagreement is that I know that the chairman of LOGOC and his team want to be absolutely apolitical. The ODA will be in part a political organisation. That is why I disagree with the noble Baroness on the need to appoint the chairman of LOGOC to the authority. The amendment proposed by my noble friend Lord Brooke of Sutton Mandeville—who, sadly, is not in his seat; I suspect that he is in the other part of this place—is sensible and I support it. On Amendment No. 5, which would leave out paragraphs 7 and 8 on page 32, I am not sure that I have the same understanding as the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee. I sense from what she said that the authority has to appoint a finance director, and so on and that the Secretary of State will have some hand in that. I believe that the authority should appoint a finance director and a director of transport, but that the authority should be totally responsible for those appointments, because it will be accountable for the performance of those appointees. Amendment No. 6 is sensible. I do not see the need for the word ””other””. Staff are staff. The authority needs to appoint them. That is where it should rest.