• Question by: Peter Hulme Cross
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

Obviously you try to reach an agreement before going to arbitration. That is standard practice. However, it looks as though no agreement is going to be reached here, so that is where it will go.

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

Metronet say there was an additional amount of work which was requested, to the tune of about £80 million. Also, the PPP Arbiter, Chris Bolt, did rule that in this particular case, Metronet did carry out the work in an efficient and economic manner and there is, therefore, a strong implication that Metronet should not have to pay for that additional work. It is not all about Metronet, it is about London Underground as well. LU will be culpable, will they not, for £80 million - maybe not £750 million - but there will be a sum to pay.

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

What about the Chancery Lane incident which led to London Underground having to ask for the overhaul of the Central Line fleet, which was completed successfully? Are you not going to pay anything towards that?

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

Many of the station refurbishments were where LU has increased the specification.

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

The truth is you have misled Londoners by saying you are not going to pay any more and you are going to pay more.

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

But your case was that you are not going to pay anything at all, and yet I have come up with a point where you are going to be obliged to pay, and that is going to be a cost to Londoners. So, do not say you are not going to pay any more, because you have just said you are going to pay because LU has asked for extra work. They have done it in the refurbishment of the stations as well.

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

Also, Metronet is expecting more money. They have made it quite clear that extra work has been asked for by London Underground, to the tune of something like £750 million have they not?

• Question by: Geoff Pope
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

So you are saying that the pace of investment has accelerated. Is that over and a+bove the initial investment programme?

• Question by: Valerie Shawcross
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

This is obviously one of those issues where the Government - in this case the Legal Services Commission - is trying to resolve what is basically an efficiency issue by putting in place a national system, but it will not work for London, and London needs to be released from an overly rigid national fee framework. You mentioned ethnic minority communities. I have to say I am particularly worried about the impact on the clients of ethnic minority companies. I gather there is a proposal that there would be a minimum size of contract so that the smaller firms -...

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 23 May 2007

What I am complaining about is you having a manifesto commitment that you have not followed through on. I am agreeing that this is a crucial issue. I would say to you that the way to deal with the difficulties that all boroughs are rightly in - we have all been there in our time, or most of us have in terms of borough councils. The way to deal with that is not to beat them up and to threaten to take away their powers and to try and get the government to give you the powers to gang up...