• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

Given that I for one agree with you - and I think everybody here pretty much agrees on that - you must be concerned that in paragraph 10 of his statement, the Secretary of State used the phrase "So if the project were to go ahead" What are you doing to pursue the Secretary of State to ensure that he firms up and says, "It is not `if" but `when""?

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

In an endeavour to assure you that our side are very positive about Crossrail, I hope you will appreciate one of the grounds for concern that stems from the statement. It is, in fact, the specific language used by the Secretary of State set against the past history of it. I know that you want to get Crossrail forward as much as we do but you told the Assembly at the meeting on 21 May that on 13 May, the Secretary of State made the statement to the Commons saying "The Government continues to support the development of Crossrail. We...

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

I am precisely trying to talk up this project and we always know the Mayor is on dodgy ground when he resorts to personal abuse.

• Question by: Sally Hamwee
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

I think that we would all agree on the desirability of having it in place for the Olympics but if it is not, Ken, as I understand it, the last part of the work would be invisible on a day?to?day basis because it would be the commissioning. Will you be urging the work at least to get to that stage so that London is not in a state of disruption at the time of the Olympics?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

One of the problems that we have had on the Tube over many years is that corners have been cut on major projects to achieve tight deadlines or to achieve tight cost figures. Can you given us an undertaking now that to achieve those targets that you have been talking about today, there will not be corners cut on Crossrail because it has to exist to serve Londoners for years after the Olympics have gone and the party is over?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

That would be helpful. Just listening to what you say about Crossrail, I appreciate that I think everyone supports Crossrail and everyone is very positive about it. You seem to think you can do it for less money than the Government claim it would cost and quicker than the Government claim it can be done because you have said that you might be able to get it in time for the Olympics. What do you base that difference of opinion on?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

I will join the Mayor and thousands of residents of East London, particularly in Hackney, in welcoming the East London line after some outrageous delays frankly. It does then bring us on to this next question about the East London line, which is the stations and I wondered what progress there had been on plans for new stations along the northern extension.

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

That would be helpful. Just listening to what you say about Crossrail, I appreciate that I think everyone supports Crossrail and everyone is very positive about it. You seem to think you can do it for less money than the Government claim it would cost and quicker than the Government claim it can be done because you have said that you might be able to get it in time for the Olympics. What do you base that difference of opinion on?

• Question by: Roger Evans
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

The private sector contribution to this project is obviously very important and we have heard different figures for this. Crossrail have told us that the most they think they can get from the private sector is about £5 billion. London First were saying around £2 billion the other day. Have you done any work to project the amount of private sector contribution there will be to the total cost of the scheme?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 16 July 2003

But for East London line stations on the northern extension?