Select Committee on Public Accounts Minutes of Evidence

Examination of Witnesses (Questions 280-286)



Mr Rendel

  280. There was one thing I had not quite understood from what Mr Holden said in reply to Mr Love. I think you said the increased revenues over the next few years is to be roughly split between the increase in ticket price and the increase in the number of passengers, is that correct?
  (Mr Holden) I think I said it would not be predominately one or the other.

  281. Right. Your increase in ticket prices is going to be what, a few per cent over the next ten years. You said just now in reply to Mr Gardiner it would be 1 a year.
  (Mr Holden) I said between 1 and 1.50 annually over the next ten years which cumulatively over that period of time is significant, 30 to 40 per cent.

  282. I may have misunderstood the answer but I think, Sir Richard, you said the number of passengers you were basing your forecasts on in the next ten years was much more like 100 per cent, if not more than that.
  (Sir Richard Mottram) The forecast which I think I referred to was one which would take passenger numbers from around seven million in the year 2000 or thereabouts to around 11Ö million in the year 2010.

  283. Which seems to be rather higher than Mr Holden suggested.
  (Mr Holden) It is about 50 per cent, so in the same order.

  Mr Rendel: Right.

Mr Love

  284. Just a quick one, perhaps it would be easier to have a minute on this, Sir Richard, it is in relation to regeneration values. We talked earlier and you mentioned King's Cross and Stratford had a greater impact than Ebbsfleet, that is not the case in terms of jobs created, but it does mention development values. I wonder if you could give us a note on the impact of development values on regeneration activity in those particular areas? I think that would be helpful.
  (Sir Richard Mottram) Yes[9].

Mr Williams

  285. We will accept that. One final question, on page eight there is a section entitled "Lessons learned" and in that it says that these lessons we hope will be borne in mind for future Public Private Partnerships. Can you tell me whether in the context of current discussions in relation to London Underground lessons learned on that page have been taken into account?
  (Sir Richard Mottram) In so far as they apply to London Underground business, yes.

  286. Categorically?
  (Sir Richard Mottram) Yes.

  Chairman: Okay. Thank you very much. I am sorry it has been rather a long session and a somewhat fractious one. I am sorry we part on terms less than amicable but I think what it does emphasise is that we have always understood on this Committee and our witnesses have always understood it is crucially important if we are to do our work efficiently and you are not to end up as witnesses having to squabble with the NAO over facts and figures leaving us even more confused that we do have clearly agreed reports. If there are irreconcilable disputes between the partner and the NAO at least the Committee is entitled to have a note about it in a significant time if possible before we meet to see if we can resolve the issue. Thank you very much everyone.


9   Note: See Evidence, Appendix 2, page 32 (PAC 00-01/164). Back

previous page contents

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2001
Prepared 30 July 2001