Search questions

• Reference: 2001/0103-1
• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

Will your term be a failure if it is not in place by 2004 and when and how will you measure the success of the scheme and judge whether it is worth continuing? .

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

I'm delighted that you say that you're keen to cooperate with the government to make the best of a bad job, although I'm a little alarmed that you qualified that by saying that it's possible you might, if you see the opportunity, take further legal challenges to the PPP and my alarm is added to by the fact that the committee that I chair, will next week have a reply from TfL where we've asked them what preparations they're carrying out to take on the management of the Underground, and they basically say that their policy is purely to oppose...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

So I take your answer as meaning, then, that -- I can read this out, if you'd like me to, it's very brief: 'We're asking for details of TfL's preparation for taking responsibility for managing the Underground' and the reply is that 'the Commissioner for Transport believes, like the Mayor, that the PPP represents an inherently unworkable management scheme'. I've cut out the middle bit. It goes on to say 'TfL will therefore continue to oppose the government's PPP and advocate an alternative plan' It says nothing about the work that's taking place.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

I take it from what you're saying, then, that after this meeting you will instruct Bob Kiley, the commissioner, to take a more constructive stance in negotiating on the PPP?

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

That's certainly apparent. I think your distinction is somewhat semantic, but the other point I wanted to raise is one on which I'm a little less happy, is you've waxed lyrical about the Deloitte & Touche report. You haven't clarified that within it, it says, 'You should not rely on our work as being comprehensive' and it says, 'Our work is not intended to be a substitute for a detailed evaluation leading to a conclusion of whether the proposal is likely to provide value for money.' It also said that the Underground, or its financial advisors, hadn't been able to...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

You could conclude that consultants will come back with whatever you ask them to come back with. You pay them a lot of money, they come back with a thick report which roughly says what you asked them to say in the first place, and I think that obviously is somewhat disreputable if it turns out to be the case. To this end, I asked Bob Kiley on 30 August, to provide me with details of the brief given to Deloitte & Touche for their work, any amendments that were made to that brief, any amendments that were made to...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

One of the tragedies in life is I generally get reported as being a critic of yours. Now, on this issue, obviously both as a constituency member and as a person with a great interest in East London and probably as a Labour group member as well, we don't have a formal policy on this, this is an excellent proposal, although there are a few questions that clearly need to be answered and I think there would obviously have to be some sort of public inquiry before the thing goes ahead. With public inquiries, you don't only have to deal...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

So there we are, totally unreportable and unquotable, because I'm broadly agreeing with you, but I think it is excellent stuff, if we can deliver it and I imagine the Labour members will be very keen to work with you to help to achieve that potential. You may also, by the way, find people south of the river feel a bit left out by this, but let's leave that until it emerges.

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

I think the first question here is somewhat separate from the others, which is that a lot of us in London are thinking that this project is bigger than you, and in particular Derek Turner, seem to think it is. Just because you could describe it on a fag packet or a beer mat doesn't mean that it's going to be easy to pull together because it requires all sorts of clever electronic systems to talk to one another. It requires retail outlets, like with the National Lottery, but cleverer, to issue tickets, it requires Mrs Bloggs to get a...

• Question by: John Biggs
• Meeting date: 05 September 2001

That's a somewhat worrying answer because I think the Labour position, as distinct from the Tory position, is that we have no problem whatsoever with the principle of the congestion charge and we think that it is probably an answer to the problems of congestion in central London, but you've got to get the details right. You've got to get them right in two regards. One is all those wicked issues about people on low incomes, about people who live on the edge of the zone, about rat-running, about the air quality effect of this. All that sort of detail...