• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

Much as we do not seem to be involved in the debate, west London does need it for its sustained economic growth and the driving power that it has for London. Finance does not seem to be one of your best areas this morning. You have just said that you could finance Crossrail with an £8 billion bond, backed by the £8 billion expenditure on the GLA. However, not so long ago you were also saying that you needed a congestion charge around Heathrow so that it too contributed to Crossrail. You seem to be financing it from a number...

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

It is still something that can be done much more quickly. All it needs is political will; you could start by infilling some of the bits that will not be the East London and the West London Line.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

): I take it from that that when you met the Secretary of State on 13th March, as you refer to in your report to us, he gave you no indication that the Government had slipped on its timeframe.

• Question by: Elizabeth Howlett
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

You said that Bob Kiley has estimated the Crossrail 1 cost at £7 billion: have you told that to the Secretary of State and does he believe you?

• Question by: Jenny Jones
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

Ken, Crossrail is clearly taking up your time and energy and your team's time and energy. Is it worthwhile, when you have a project like Orbirail which could be done fairly cheaply and quickly, as far as railway is concerned? It would also relieve pressure on central London and would give you some part of your London Plan; it would also bring some huge benefits to some deprived communities along that route.

• Question by: Bob Neill
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

You told the Planning and SDS Committee last year that, unless Crossrail was delivered, you might as well rip up the London Plan and start again. You said that, without it, the London Plan would be inoperative. The London Plan runs effectively until 2020, 2016 all the figures; it is clear now from the Secretary of State that there is no prospect of Crossrail being delivered until the very end of the London Plan period. Are you going to rip up your plan and start again, or were you spoofing us all along?

• Question by: Richard Barnes
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

BAA has just published its response to the RUCATSE report, which included a positive statement about a fourth runway at Heathrow, which everybody ignores, and the need for another terminal if that was built. How would that impact on Crossrail and your congestion charges? Do you support one and not the other?

• Question by: Mike Tuffrey
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

Does the letter actually spell out in hard terms what they are going to contribute? Can you tell us what share of the bid costs are likely to be met by the private sector?

• Question by: Eric Ollerenshaw
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

Given the importance of the London Development Agency in all this, and all the comings and goings of officers etcetera, including the change in Chairmanship at the LDA, is it you re-shaping the LDA to perform its new function of drawing up the Masterplan for the Olympics and changing where it spends its money? Or is that your view that the LDA would not be competent to do that without all these changes?

• Question by: Meg Hillier
• Meeting date: 21 May 2003

If I could just pick up on the legacy issues again if you are going to be talking to the CBI and business. I am sure people in some of the other agencies are having some of these discussions about local interest, but in terms of the facilities that will be built and either run or adapted after the event, I would be glad if you could be raising very firmly at this stage the input that business needs to make in that. If we rely solely on a public sector regeneration scheme it may not be sustainable in the...