Examination of Witnesses (Questions 200
- 219)
THURSDAY 9 JULY 1998
MR
PETER
MANDELSON
and MISS
CLARE
PILLMAN
200. That actually was my question, not that
you should be ready at this stage but what is your critical path,
when do you see that ticketing is going to be decided upon, what
are the sort of time targets that you have set yourself?
(Mr Mandelson) The ticketing
system has been agreed; it is, as it has been announced, described
to this Committee, and the way it integrates with the transport
system is as it has been revised following, amongst other things,
your own Committee's Report. I do not see any need or any scope
for changing the principles of the ticketing system.
201. I meant on the specifics, like pricing?
(Mr Mandelson) If, on
the other hand, we sort of run into some problem, or obstacle,
or something that we did not anticipate, then, "Crikey, you
know, I didn't think of that; should we change it to take account
of this?", or "This actually would work better than
our original plan, should we do it differently?". I am perfectly
happy for the Company to carry on thinking in that way, indeed
they should be thinking, I do not want our plans to be sort of
set in aspic two years in advance and everyone to stop thinking
from then until the opening of the Dome about how we might be
able to do things differently and better. But the concepts, the
principles, the overall framework, all that has now been agreed,
and I would be very surprised indeed if, in any respect, any sort
of key respect, changes were made. And, of course, we have already
rolled out the ticketing system to the travel trade, because they
need to be geared up and we need to talk about indicative pricing
levels and packages with the travel trade now. I know it seems
a long time in advance, but it is not that long in advance, given
what has got to be done and what has got to be organised, and
that is already being done. For the public, of course, we are
not going to start marketing the Dome on a mass scale and in a
systematic way until the tickets themselves come on supply, come
onto the market, and that will not be, obviously, until next Summer,
or so.
202. But, look, I am not suggesting, and I do
not think anyone on this Committee is suggesting - we are not
two years away, we are only 17 months away - but I am not suggesting
that even at this stage everything should be set in aspic, as
you put it. I am simply asking you what sort of target dates
you have for specifics, and if you like I will ask you a specific
question, though it is not my wish to do so.
(Mr Mandelson) Do.
203. When are you going to announce the price
to enter the Dome?
(Mr Mandelson) We will
do so when the price has been agreed, set, by the Company, and
we do not have to do that until we start selling the tickets and
marketing them, and that, of course, will not be until next year.
But you had a very thorough discussion, I think, about this yesterday,
quite rightly, with Bob Ayling and Jennie Page and I hope they
were able to satisfy you about their approach. I, as the shareholder,
have to be satisfied about two things. One, that the Company
knows where it is going and what it is doing in every single respect,
and I am, well satisfied that the Company knows what it is doing,
where it is going, within the critical path that they have set
themselves. But that, secondly, and importantly, their decisions
will result not only in a first-class Millennium Experience, an
unmissable and unforgettable event at the Millennium Dome in Greenwich
and its associated Programme, but that it will be possible for
every single person in this country who wishes to to get there
simply and at an affordable cost. Now that is why I am eternally
vigilant about all these matters. But, I can assure you, I am
entirely satisfied that the Company are keeping all these things
in proper balance, they are balancing obviously their need to
get the revenue that they need, they are not a profit-making organisation,
they are not trying to generate heaps of profit to line the pockets
of shareholders, they are aiming to break even. But the financing
of the Dome, as you know, is roughly half and half, half a grant
in aid from the Millennium Commission and half revenue from private
sector sponsorship, from commercial ventures and from ticket sales.
Now they have to balance, when it comes to ticket sales, the
need for the revenue that they require and the price of a ticket
that is going to make it affordable for people to come, and I
am well satisfied that that is precisely what they are doing.
204. Alright, but I still think you must not
blame the media for being a little bit sceptical when at the moment
there is no real detail?
(Mr Mandelson) I do not
blame the media for being sceptical. The job of the media is
to question, to probe and to challenge, but that is not the same
as to pull threads, undermine and destroy. Now I am very glad
to say that we have, sort of by and large, the former approach
overwhelmingly taken by the media in this country, and not the
latter. And when I think back, and as I read books and the history
of what people in my position, comparable positions, had to go
through when they were organising the 1951 Festival of Britain,
and, worse still, the 1851 Great Exhibition, they were not simply
put through hoops and made to cross - they were put through -
it was a nightmare, it was a nightmare in 1851, it was only something
short of a nightmare for my predecessor, whoever that was, in
1951.
205. Alright. Let us just move on to the legacy.
I am actually a believer in the Dome, because I think a lot of
people do not realise that it is structurally built to last for
some 80 years, I think that is correct, so it is going to not
just have an impact on Greenwich and London for the one year but
for many, many years thereafter. And if I can indulge myself
for a moment; before I became a Member of Parliament, I was involved
in investment in broadcast engineering and radio stations, and
I well recall that there was an American organisation called the
Audio Engineering Society, which exhibits in New York once a year
and then the following year in Europe, and they wanted to do it
in the United Kingdom, and it was a very sad thing that they found
no venue, there was nowhere large enough. They wanted to do it
in London, there was no venue large enough, they did it once in
two hotels, but it did not work; they then looked at Birmingham
but there were not enough hotels nearby, sadly, to the National
Exhibition Centre. And it seems to me that the Dome might make
a marvellous exhibition centre for the years to come for London.
Have you had any approaches, have you started to think about
what the Dome will be used for after 2001?
(Mr Mandelson) I think
this is a very important area indeed and one that, I suspect,
your Committee will return to, in due course. Because, since
this Government took the decision to seek a long-term use for
the Dome, we have been very encouraged to receive some quite imaginative
and realistic proposals for the Dome's future use: some for sports
uses, some for leisure uses, some for commercial uses, including
a proposal that is being developed by London First for the possibility
of an international convention centre to be housed at the Dome,
following the year 2000, but I should stress that that is one
of a number of possible uses that have been floated with us.
Now, let me say to the Committee, and I think I can say this for
the first time, that a Working Group at official level has been
established to develop the best mechanism for encouraging and
assessing the expressions of interest that we are now receiving.
We are not going to take precipitate, premature decisions or
judgements about those expressions of interest, because it is
quite clear to me that once the Dome has been fully constructed
and fitted out and once the Millennium Experience is up and running,
in just over 18 months' time, that people will only then be able
to see its full potential. So I do not think we need to make
hasty judgements now about its future use, we can do so when that
full potential has been identified and realised and the market
as well as other public interest sources of interest have started
to be generated. However, this Working Group has now been created,
it is under way, it will make a preliminary report to Ministers,
at the Prime Minister's request, by the end of July. The Government
has in mind three sets of criteria on which to consider and assess
expressions of interest. One is financial, to ensure that the
taxpayers' money spent on the site is recouped, and, as you know,
a very limited amount of taxpayers' money from the total sum has
been spent, that was channelled through English Partnerships to
reclaim and decontaminate the site; that taxpayers' expense will
need to be recouped. The second set of criteria are environmental;
we wish to ensure that any proposal is sympathetic to the wider
regeneration of the Greenwich peninsular and the whole of the
Thames Gateway area. And the third is sustainability, and suitability,
to ensure a fitting and sustainable use for the Dome, bearing
in mind its unique national status. Now, I think, broadly speaking,
those will be the three criteria, financial, environmental and
sustainability, which the officials' Working Group will put more
flesh on and which will help to guide Ministers in their discussions
and consideration of future uses of the Dome.
206. Thank you for that answer. I am right in
saying, am I, so that English Partnerships own the land on which
the Dome is sited, as I understand it, the New Millennium Experience
Company actually own the Dome and its structure on the land?
(Mr Mandelson) Yes.
207. They are the two main players, plus, of
course, the Millennium Commission, which has to try to regain
money during the course of that year. Tell me, have you given
any thought, or is this part of your Working Party, as to whether
the New Millennium Experience Company will continue to own the
Dome from the year 2001 onwards, or would the plan be to sell
it off, are they obliged to sell it off, or are they allowed to
continue to operate it, if the Working Party says it can? Can
you give an undertaking that the Treasury will not profit from
the disposal of the Dome and its contents, over and above that
which the taxpayer has already put in through English Partnerships?
(Mr Mandelson) I would
hesitate to give any guarantee about the future actions and behaviour
of the Treasury. All I can say is that the Treasury are part
of this Working Group. I have discussed the matter with the Chief
Secretary, who is committed, using my words extremely carefully,
to examining very thoroughly every possible future use. He, like
other members of the Government, want to see a permanent use,
and I am sure the Chief Secretary agrees with the Prime Minister,
when he said that it is "too good to pull down". Now
that is our starting-point, that is the Chief Secretary's starting-point,
but equally the Chief Secretary has to be mindful of two things:
one, there was an initial, modest investment by the taxpayer,
in reclaiming the land, and that should be recouped; he also has
to be mindful of the Cabinet's decision, when they decided a year
ago to go ahead with the project, that no further taxpayers' money,
Treasury revenue, should be expended on the project. Now when
the project ends and its future use begins is a matter for us
to discuss in some detail with the Chief Secretary, but they are
co-operating very fully with this examination, and I am sure their
views, along with others, will be taken into account as this develops.
The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions
are in the driving-seat, I know that the Deputy Prime Minister
takes a strong personal interest in this, as he does in every
other aspect of it, both the Millennium Experience itself and
all the transport arrangements, both the Jubilee Line and the
river, that he has ploughed so much into, but also, of course,
the Millennium Village, which his Department have sponsored, following
his original idea for a model community for the 21st
century to be built alongside the Dome, as is happening now on
the peninsular. So there is an enormous range of permanent legacy
arising from our original decision and investment, the peninsular,
the Village, the transport systems, all of which will be permanent,
and we want to add to that a permanent use for the Dome.
Mr Fabricant: As you quite
rightly say, I think this is something we will be returning to.
Thank you very much.
Mr Fraser
208. I am conscious of the time, so shall keep
my questions short. But I have been making notes, Mr Mandelson,
from what you have said to some of the other questioners. You
have staked your political career on the Dome. I have got a direct
question, which I hope you are able to answer: will you, therefore,
turn down any possible promotion, which it is said that you long
for, to continue with the Dome project, so that you can personally
take full responsibility for its success, or failure, in the year
2000?
(Mr Mandelson) This is
a matter entirely for the Prime Minister and not for me.
209. No, he can make the offer to you, it is
up to you whether you accept it or not. Will you refuse an offer
made to you by the Prime Minister?
(Mr Mandelson) As I do
not know whether the Prime Minister is going to make any such
offer and what that offer might be, I think it would be premature
for me to comment on it.
Mr Fraser: That is quite
specific.
Chairman: Can I just intervene,
Minister, to say that my interpretation of the situation, from
the remote days when I was a Minister, is that if the Prime Minister
makes you an offer and you turn it down it is not totally reliable
that he will retain you where you are.
Mr Fraser
210. That may be so.
(Mr Mandelson) What do
you think, Mr Fraser?
211. I would like to know what you think, but
I am not going to get an answer from you, clearly?
(Mr Mandelson) You have
had an answer, even if it is not the answer that you wanted, or
expected.
212. I have to say that you have talked about
several things this morning, and I do not believe we have had
straight answers from you on many of the questions that have been
put to you. You have been extremely generous to us, and I have
noted how many times you have praised us, as a Committee, but
you still have not answered fundamental questions about what is
going on in the Dome, and, certain questions that Mr Fabricant
asked you about the sponsorship, you came back with some interesting
answers which I look forward to reading in the evidence from today.
I put it to you that you are trying to be all things to all men
with the Dome itself. How do you identify more directly the sort
of attraction you are trying to offer; you would not be in the
position you are in now, which is actually concocting a dog's
breakfast, because you are saying that "we have got local
consultation, there are villages around the country, every town
will have an opportunity to put their display in, we don't know
at this stage whether this androgenous figure is going to stay
as a single, double figure, male or female, or anything else,
we have got several Zones we haven't got sponsorship for"?
You are flying in the wind at the moment. This is another concept,
for which the Government is infamous, of style over content, and
it is appalling, I believe, to see it continue in this way, given
the fact that, despite, you say, over 18 months, we have got 17
months between now and the millennium itself. And you may well
smile, the Chairman and other members of the Committee. Could
you please answer directly the question that we at the moment
need to ask you, is the content, you talk about having ideas,
we have no idea about the final content. Do you feel that we
have enough time to get this together, will you resign if it is
not together, and will you give us some assurances this morning
about the sponsorship that my colleague, Mr Fabricant, has asked
you, which I do not believe you answered?
(Mr Mandelson) The answer
to that, to your specific questions, putting aside my political
career prospects, is yes and yes. I am entirely satisfied that
we are gathering sponsorship in the way that we said we would
and that we will meet our target and that, yes, I am entirely
satisfied that the content is making good progress and will be
there, ready and waiting for you when you, I hope, come with your
family to enjoy its contents when it opens in the year 2000.
213. And you put aside the criticism about the
accountability, which was put to you earlier, when you came back
with the response, which I believe was the fact that it is the
result we are looking at, we should not worry too much about the
accountability between now and then: you stand by that?
(Mr Mandelson) As I did
not say that, I do not stand by it. So I am not quite sure what
the question is that you are putting to me.
214. The point is that we have still questions
about accountability, which I do not believe have been answered?
(Mr Mandelson) Well I
am sorry that you do not feel satisfied, but I am sure that others
who have sat through this session and will read my evidence will
be able to judge for themselves.
215. I look forward to doing that as well. Mr
Fearn asked you about tourism and the effect on tourism, and you
talked about the BTA. Can you give an assurance this morning
that the English Tourist Board will not be abolished as part of
the Comprehensive Spending Review expected this Summer, because,
as far as I see it, the English Tourist Board is a fundamental
part of promoting the Millennium Dome? And, as there is much
speculation at the moment about its future, as there is, one has
to question whether the marketing intentions of the Dome are best
represented by not knowing what is going to happen to the English
Tourist Board?
(Mr Mandelson) It has
never been suggested to me by anyone that the English Tourist
Board is in the pole position in the marketing of the Dome. I
think that the New Millennium Experience Company is in that pole
position and it is working very closely, as it has done throughout,
with the British Tourist Authority. This is a British event and
a British responsibility and a British appeal, attracting tourists
that are going to come from all parts of Britain, as a result
of our decision to organise the millennium celebrations in this
way. But, as for the future of the English Tourist Board that
you referred to, that is not a matter for me, it is a matter for
others in Government.
216. The transportation question has come up
several times this morning and I am sure will continue to do so,
and I, for one, have a lot of admiration for Glenda Jackson in
the task that she has undertaken, and we have expressed that already.
It is a difficult task, as is a lot of what is involved with
the Dome itself. I cannot get my mind around your concept, as
you put it earlier, that there will be an evening out of flow
of visitors, or something like that, I do not want to quote you
directly because I only made a note. You cannot stop people speculating
about coming, we have just had that with the World Cup, every
evening on the news.
(Mr Mandelson) I do not
want to.
217. Can I just add, every evening on the news
we had people going along, trying to get tickets. You pointed
out that there should be this even flow. If I bring my wife and
children up from Dorset for them to have a day out at the Dome,
I, like many people, will come up as early as I can. If I come
up as early as I can, and Dorset is a relatively close place to
London, and it certainly is not the case if you are coming from
Scotland and elsewhere, you will come up early in the morning.
There will be a burden, therefore, on the Underground system,
which you have given us assurances this morning will be running
as it should be. Is not that going to add frustration, harassment
and a lot of ill-feeling from visitors, if they are going to be
stuck on trains in the rush hour, trying to get to the Dome; how
do you overcome that, because you cannot tell people "You
go at certain times of the day", people will buy a day ticket
and go when they wish?
(Mr Mandelson) Why should
they be stuck?
218. I think they will. Have you used the Underground
in the rush hour?
(Mr Mandelson) Yes, frequently.
Mr Fraser: And you have
never found yourself in close proximity to other people and found
you would not prefer to be elsewhere?
Chairman
219. I find that all the time, at the moment.
(Mr Mandelson) That is
a very interesting, philosophical question.
Mr Fraser
|
