Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20
- 39)
MONDAY 30 JUNE 2003
MR RICHARD
ADAMS AND
MR DAVID
SMITH
Q20 Chairman: Does a Smithfield,
Billingsgate, Spitalfields location all on one site stack up economically?
Mr Adams: Not at the moment, no,
because we have not got the money to pay for it. We see it as
a proper way of developing in the future if we can find the money
to do it. We have to live in the real world.
Q21 Chairman: Let me just explore
this because it seems to me from what you are saying that there
is an element of hope and aspiration that somehow the money will
turn up. If your model is predicated on relocating Smithfield
and Billingsgate to Spitalfields, do tell me if I am factually
incorrect, is there not a business plan that supports it? If you
took a decision in principle to make such a move, it sounds to
me as if that would be a false decision because so far it could
not happen, there is not an investment flow to make it happen.
Mr Adams: I agree, there is not
at the moment.
Q22 Chairman: So why have you put
it forward?
Mr Adams: Because we believe that
sometimes you have to say where you would like to go before you
start taking the first steps to get there. What we have said is
that if we know that that is where we would like to get to, we
believe that a first step could be the steps that we have proposed
to bring Covent Garden up to standard and we could improve that
part as the first phase of a bigger scheme. The Corporation has
been prepared to think long term and we believe that that is a
good route to it, which is what Saphir has recommended and that
is the bit we go along with, that there are benefits from having
a composite market. It is one of the reasons why we now have a
director. Last time I was here I had three clerk and superintendents
with me. We have now decided to start looking at it as a single
unit, with single management and a single director in charge of
it all. We are making steps towards it. There are existing leases
that have to be dealt with, there will be legislation needed to
move to one site and a lot of money to be found, but if we do
not have the aspiration then there is nowhere to go.
Q23 Paddy Tipping: You have got the
aspiration. What are you doing to make it happen? Has the Corporation
met the tenants at New Covent Garden?
Mr Adams: Yes, we have met the
tenants at New Covent Garden.
Q24 Paddy Tipping: What is the state
of these discussions? How are things between you and them?
Mr Adams: They seem to believe
that there is a fairy godmother or father who is going to buy
Covent Garden and put all the money in, other than us and create
a composite market. I am not saying I do not believe in fairies,
but I have not seen one yet.
Q25 Paddy Tipping: But you are not
really a fairy, are you? You are saying they can keep what they
have and you are not prepared to put anything extra in, are you?
Mr Adams: I am not saying that
no money can go in to Covent Garden. That is the bit where we
believe the Minister has misunderstood what we said or he has
not taken it on board. We have said that there is no limit to
what can go into developing Covent Garden but it has got to generate
it for itself.
Q26 Paddy Tipping: But it is not
going to come from you, the Corporation, is it?
Mr Adams: No.
Q27 Paddy Tipping: So there is nothing
there?
Mr Adams: No. We believe that
there is potential there for it to attract it from elsewhere if
they are going to diversify into the catering market and other
activities. There are plenty about. If they knew that that was
the way Covent Garden was going to be allowed to develop, they
would have had some encouragement to go there. At the moment it
is so uncertain. You have only got to walk round Covent Garden
to see what uncertainty has done.
Q28 Paddy Tipping: But your perspective
on Covent Garden is we will take it on, you can keep all your
revenue for re-investment, but at this point in time we are not
prepared to put any money in, is it not?
Mr Adams: That is right.
Q29 Paddy Tipping: Extra money in.
Mr Adams: No. But if you look
at what could be funded from the money that they currently have
to give away in tax, it starts to be significant capital sums
that they could spend funded from their own activities.
Q30 Paddy Tipping: But it is not
surprising the tenants are not very enamoured of you when you
are saying, "We'll take it on but we're not prepared to put
any of our money in."
Mr Adams: They are businessmen,
of course they would love to have somebody else pay for their
activities. We are just saying it is a business, we are prepared
to let you invest, we are not going to take any of the profit,
it all goes back into the system. The traders at Smithfield have
been prepared to put £¼ million each into their own
market and the people of Billingsgate have put in large amounts
for a new cold store. The traders are prepared to put money in
if they can see that there is a future. At the moment the future
of Covent Garden is—I do not know where it is.
Q31 Paddy Tipping: This is hard.
You are telling us you have got an aspiration, you know where
you would like to get to, but you cannot see who is pushing the
buttons, who is leading it. Who is going to make this happen?
Mr Adams: There is only one person
who can and that is the Government. They own it, they have got
the control.
Mr Smith: We have made a suggestion
to them which they have chosen not to accept.
Q32 Paddy Tipping: But earlier on,
Mr Adams, you told us you did not need this overarching market
body because you were it. Is what you told us?
Mr Adams: Yes.
Q33 Paddy Tipping: Why do you not
get on and do it then?
Mr Adams: Because we cannot control
that building as it is owned by somebody else. We are quite powerful
but not that powerful.
Q34 Paddy Tipping: Are you having
discussions with any other bodies to try and find a way forward
on this?
Mr Adams: There is only one other
body who can talk to us on Covent Garden and that is the owner.
The owner told us very politely to go somewhere else. He thinks
he might find something else.
Mr Smith: The Government only
made its announcement a week ago and, like everyone else, we had
been waiting to see what it was going to be. What incentive did
we have to invest a huge amount of time, money, effort without
knowing what the outcome would be? Based on their statement last
week, that would all have been dead money.
Q35 Paddy Tipping: This seems like
a recipe for doing nothing. Mr Adams, you said that two years
ago you came and said the same things to us, but, in fact, things
are worse, two years have passed. What are the buttons to make
this happen? Things need to change. What do you need to do to
make it change? More particularly, how can you as the Corporation,
because you are a powerful body, make things happen?
Mr Adams: Only by offering a way
forward, but when it comes down to it, I can only repeat, there
is only one person in control of Covent Garden Market and he can
offer a way forward. If that person says, "No, I don't like
your offer", he can find another one or he takes the opprobrium
for allowing his market to run down—
Q36 Chairman: Do you think the Government
has been unnecessarily sitting on its hands about this?
Mr Adams: I am employed by local
government, Chairman, so I cannot possibly comment on something
like that.
Q37 Chairman: That puts you in a
perfect position to comment on national government in that case.
Do you think they have been sitting on their hands?
Mr Adams: Yes.
Q38 Chairman: That is a very helpful
comment. Let me just follow up Mr Tipping's line of enquiry. The
Greater London Authority are fingered in this. What discussions
have you had with them? What role are they playing in looking
at this whole matter?
Mr Adams: They are a body that
I do not think has really found its role yet and they do not really
have the funding to implement things. I did go and discuss with
the Mayor's representatives the possibility of our expanding at
Spitalfields. The reason I did that was because the land that
could be used for expansion is playing fields and playing fields
were said to disappear "over the Mayor's dead body",
and I thought it would be appropriate to see whether he was planning
on dying just yet. I have to say that they were very helpful.
They saw the benefits of a composite market for London. It is
informal, I have to accept because I was not in a position to
negotiate at that stage and I am still not really. They looked
at the possibility of finding an alternative site for three markets
that did not involve taking that open space, but when they looked
they could not find something better. When we said if we take
that open space we would expect to replace it somewhere else,
the Corporation has got quite a good record of maintaining open
spaces round London, they said Okay. That is an argument for allowing
that open space to be developed and replaced.
Q39 Chairman: The Government has
cast itself in the role of a consultee in this whole exercise,
which seems a rather odd position considering it has got a big
stake in what happens to Covent Garden Market. It takes the line
in the future action section of the Minister's response to this
by throwing the ball back firmly into the court of those who operate
markets in London to sort this job out. Have you had any kind
of contact with Defra which would indicate that if all the interested
parties were magically to find a joint solution Defra would then
be willing to act on it? Have they given you any indication at
all that discussions with New Covent Garden Market would be welcome
and that they would look favourably on a jointly agreed solution?
Mr Adams: It would be unfair to
say no, which is why we went off and spoke directly with the Covent
Garden Market Authority and the tenants there, to say could we
work together. We do not want to take on a market and a lot of
tenants that do not like us. It is bad enough running a market
without adding to it in that way. We said could we work together
and the response was not as enthusiastic as we would have liked
and I suspect that coloured the view of the ministry.
| 
