Question: What lessons have you learnt form the failed 2006 World Cup bid?

Richard Caborn: Not to presume, not to be arrogant and to make sure that we use our bid to be much more pro-active rather than reactive and to use it not just as a tournament but a force for good, particularly a force for good for young people.

Question: Why is this bid the strongest of the contenders?

Richard Caborn: I think that we can bring to Fifa, the world governing body of football, as we did for the International Olympic Committee for the 2012 bid, a message that says that in partnership we could do a lot more than just a tournament.

We can have a narrative that can be used to connect young people back into sport through the power, in this particular case, of football.

I think that Fifa would very much welcome that as indeed the IOC welcomed that when we won the 2012 Olympics for London.

Question: Fifa ended the system of rotating the cup between different continents making this bid possible. Some might suggest that there was something in it for Fifa in terms of government regulation at some point in the future, is that just how football politics works?

Richard Caborn: I think the aim of the rotation system was a laudable one. I said to Sepp Blatter that it was a very courageous move in seeing the cup onto Africa, and obviously South Africa in 2010 have got the World Cup and I'm hopeful that will leave a very positive legacy as it will in South America.

But then I think it will have served its purpose and that is the reason that they have broken the rotation - it had done what it had set out to do and now it goes back to being open to bids from the rest of the world.

Question: Obviously the new Wembley stadium is an important part of the bid - given that it went so far over budget and time do you still regard it as a worthwhile project?

Richard Caborn: Very much so. Both national and international visitors who have been there have praised it and I have been very privileged to have been round the world and seen many stadia and there is no doubt that it is the best in the world as a football stadium.

We can be incredibly proud of Wembley and yes we all wanted to keep the twin towers but the arch is now as important.

Question: You were always keen to see the Olympic stadium turned over to a football club after the games - are you convinced its legacy is being secured?

Richard Caborn: I think so and obviously that is the subject of negotiations at the moment. Again we have great experience of securing legacy for stadia. I look at the City of Manchester stadium which is now the Man City stadium, which was there for the commonwealth games and I have no doubt there will be a very strong legacy for the Olympic stadium as well.

Question: Are you convinced that the costs of the Olympics are being properly managed and kept down?

Richard Caborn: Very much so. The structures are in place, we have the most professional team working on the Olympics. All the lessons have been learnt from previous bids whether it's Munich, Barcelona or Sydney.

The budget will come as set and we will be very proud of the Olympics 2012 and its legacy will be a big sporting one and a regeneration legacy for the east end of London.

Question: Your successor as sports minister has been critical of the size of footballers' wages - what do you think?

Richard Caborn: I think there ought to be cost controls. Huge television revenues are now washing through into wages and that is something football ought to look at and some of that ought to be invested back into football.

There ought to be a discussion, not just at the English level but at the European level, and that's why the new European white paper and the new treaty changes on sport are important in this area and there ought to be some relationship between income and expenditure.