Examination of Witnesses (Questions 100
- 112)
THURSDAY 15 JUNE 2000
MR DAVID
CLAYTON-SMITH,
MR KEITH
FAULKNER AND
MR ADRIAN
HOSFORD
Derek Wyatt
100. To be fair, when Mr Mandelson was the Dome
Minister there was a fair amount of flak attached to him and the
association with the Dome, so it was not as though we were not,
I would not say, anticipating bad news but there were, until he
was replaced, quite a lot of bad stories. It was identified as
his Dome and his grandfather's place in the Festival of Britain.
(Mr Clayton-Smith) I find it quite difficult to speculate
on that. Certainly from our point of view, and I suppose it echoes
slightly the Chairman's comments, we would not expect commercial
relationships to impact on the type and quality of news. I do
not know if that quite answers the question.
(Mr Faulkner) I think it would be helpful also, as
I am sure the Committee is already aware, to describe the nature
of the sponsors' relationship with NMEC, there were only certain
matters which it was our responsibility to review and agree with
the NMEC. Clearly as far as their media strategy was concerned,
they made us aware of their intentions but we were not part of
a decision process as to whether it was a good or a bad strategy.
That is not to say that we did not from time to time express views
but it was certainly not something we were in a position to influence
in any way.
101. You got involved and you announced to your
global players that you were a partner, this was the biggest event
on 31 December anywhere in the world, I still consider it as the
biggest Millennium event, has that perception changed from the
people you speak to and the people you do business with? Have
they said to you "Thank God we did not do it" or "It
is a rocky ride this, is it not?"
(Mr Clayton-Smith) Certainly at the outset and when
we made the announcement there was a very high level of anticipation
and excitement at the scale of the event which was coming through.
I think people we deal with now are impacted as much as everyone
else by what they read in the press but certainly it has not had
any impact upon our reputation as a company involved.
(Mr Faulkner) That is also our experience. I think
both the members of the public we speak to and our business clients
see the issue of the message we are getting across and our association
with the Dome quite separately from many of the issues that we
have been talking about this morning. They respect what we are
trying to do and they value the messages that we are trying to
put across.
102. Do you think generally that British culture
prefers failure to success on this issue?
(Mr Hosford) Are you asking our personal opinions
on that subject?
103. Yes. Here you are, 84 per cent returns
say they like it, everyone I have spoken to likes it.
(Mr Hosford) Personal opinion, I think people have
different agendas and the fact is that the media play at whatever
agenda they are playing at. People are not really interested in
stories about the fact that it is twice bigger than the nearest
paid for attraction. The fact that visitors love going, people
are not paying attention to that agenda, it is not newsworthy
in that sense.
104. If we were to move forward, we have a couple
of bids in the pipeline, there may or may not be an Expo, the
cultural capital of Europe, City cultural bid in 2008, perhaps
an Olympics, does this make you feel that next time around you
will look at the political association and financial responsibility
with a great deal more care?
(Mr Faulkner) I think we took a great deal of care
this time and I think, as we have indicated already, it continues
to be successful from our point of view. That is not say that
in some of the detail of course we will learn, as I think everyone
will learn from this process, certain things which could be done
a little better. Certainly it would not dissuade us from following
a similar route in future.
(Mr Clayton-Smith) I would agree. One of the really
important things we have learnt out of the process is that such
a large endeavour over such a compressed period of time means
that the conventions of a bedding in period to make sure everything
works well is sadly foreshortened. Certainly we want to make sure
that operational issues are ironed out before the public are let
in.
105. Lastly, of the two bidders for the actual
future of the area, one that is left, I think, Nomura, has said
that it would contemplate taking over if it got the contract,
as it were, tomorrow and running it which obviously politically
would be helpful but it may not be the best bid, so, I am sure
that is an interesting dilemma for the Committee making their
minds up. Do you think, in other words, that the greatest thing
is the legacy that is being created by this and that in two years'
time we will be standing from the hill tops praising it because
it is the multi-media centre of the world?
(Mr Hosford) I think the legacy is a very, very important
thing. That is what we are all hoping for. As a result of this
people of Britain will have been enriched and the opportunities
of the new century will be more relevant and vivid for them individually.
Do not forget the legacy because we outside of the Dome in the
infrastructure, we run national programmes, we run educational
programmes where we try to get the opportunities of the new Millennium
up in the agenda in people's minds, in schools, in cities all
over the UK and obviously in the Talk Zone experience. The legacy
of all that, we hope, is an enriched Britain and we will continue
to try and build on that after the year is over. I would say the
legacy is the most important thing and it is amazing how the news
will seem in a year's time or whatever. If you judge it on the
criteria was it successful because the visitors liked it and did
it get an awful lot of people, forget whether there are 12 or
seven, it is still a hell of a lot of people and families who
have been and that is very successful. I think the legacy of this
hopefully will be much more positive than at the current time.
Chairman
106. It would be idle and stupid to decry that
there have been a very great many problems involved in the project.
Let me put this to you. In 1996 if they had not started off with
an utterly unrealistic projection of the number of visitors, and
if there had not been that kind of projection of visitors, would
not any attraction charging £20 a year for the standard fee
give its eyeteeth to have had the number of visitors that the
Dome has had?
(Mr Hosford) Absolutely. It is a tremendous achievement
if you look at it in absolute terms as opposed to against unrealistic
expectations perhaps.
Mr Keen
107. I understand I have to declare an interest
in that I got free tickets for New Year's Eve. I could not say
that without adding what an insult it is to have to say that because
to think politics will be influenced or corrupted by the ticket
when it was a difficult decision to go or not, to a great extent
I went because it was a duty and I was involved in this but that
is the Members Interest rules. How long before the 31 December
were each of you involved in the Dome plan?
(Mr Faulkner) As I have indicated already I was part
of a small management team that met with a group that was led
at that time by Jennie Page. It was following that meeting we
actually made that decision to become a founding sponsor so my
connection goes back to around October 1997.
(Mr Hosford) My involvement is since the inception
really.
(Mr Clayton-Smith) We were first approached in summer
1998 and I became involved in September 1998.
108. For all of you quite a long time before
the opening. Did the thought go through your mind that the Government
and politicians were getting too identified with it in the media
and therefore were antagonising the media? We were all expecting
them to criticise it, I think that is the media job to look at
politicians very, very closely. How quickly were you aware that
was a likelihood?
(Mr Clayton-Smith) Certainly we had an awareness of
the profile of the project and therefore there were senior politicians
who were creating and having an interest in the project but in
terms of, if you like, interference or involvement in the process
of development, we did not feel that.
109. That was not so much my worry at all. Three
quarters of a billion pounds is an awful lot, the Government had
to be involved. Were you concerned that politicians appeared to
be part of the project rather than monitoring it from behind closed
doors? Do you believe that is what antagonised the media's response
and really caused the poor media response to the thing?
(Mr Faulkner) It is very difficult for us to speculate
on that. Exactly as David has said, we were always aware that
there was a political content to this and we were encouraged to
some extent that this was a project that started under one administration
and continued under another. We were concerned at times when the
media perhaps focused unduly on that aspect of it but we were
not particularly surprised.
(Mr Hosford) I think it was one of those projects
that called for leadership across society and that was evident.
I do not think that was a problem for the project. For brave projects
like this you need leadership and you need supporting leadership
from the institutions of society. It does not seem unreasonable
that people express their opinions. They were largely supported
I think until New Year's Eve.
110. The New Year's Eve ticket problem and the
queuing and stuff, do you think editors of our national press
were really so annoyed that they triggered off the bad press?
Do you believe that is the case?
(Mr Hosford) I am sure they are far too professional
for that kind of human reaction.
111. You say with a smile on your face for the
radio listener. There is a bit of irony in that answer.
(Mr Hosford) No, I am sure professionally they would
not be. It is not in their interest to be. It was, obviously,
a cock-up. That particular ticketing and the queuing and stuff
was very unfortunate and very untimely and that is the way it
was. We need to go on from that and build on the success.
Chairman
112. The history of state construction projects
here or anywhere else in the world is not very auspicious, if
one looks, for example, at the sorry saga of the building of the
British Library, which has gone on for most of our lifetimes.
There is a difference here in that as a state construction projection
this has been a remarkable success. It is a remarkable structure,
built on time and built to budget. Looking back on it, taking
into account the decision of the last Government that this should
be a state project and a state run project, would it not have
been better once it had been delivered for it to have been turned
over to a private enterprise organisation with experience of running
visitor attractions actually to operate?
(Mr Hosford) I think with the benefit of 50:50 hindsight
that comment may have a lot of relevance. Certainly some of the
learning that comes out of the project would suggest that being
absolutely clear about what you are trying to achieve upfront,
ie stating your requirements and the budget and the timescales
that you need to deliver that requirement, and having good leadership
and using the private sector particularly in the professional
areas that they are very competent in, department management,
those sort of learnings are very relevant on this project and
hopefully will be some of the good that comes out of the legacy
of the whole thing.
Chairman: Thank you very much, gentlemen.
It has been very helpful.
|
