Examination of Witnesses (Questions 307-319)
MR RICHARD
CABORN MP, MS
KAREN BUCK
MP AND MR
BEN STAFFORD
9 NOVEMBER 2005
Q307 Chairman: Minister, may I warmly
welcome you here this afternoon? We are always delighted to see
you and to be graced with two important persons at the same time
is absolutely overwhelming. Can you identify yourselves for the
record?
Mr Caborn: I am Richard Caborn,
Minister of Sport with responsibilities for the Olympics in DCMS
with my Secretary of State.
Ms Buck: Karen Buck, Department
for Transport and I have responsibility for London in this context.
Mr Stafford: Ben Stafford, Department
for Transport, with particular responsibilities for Olympic transport.
Chairman: Are there any Members who wish
to declare an interest?
Graham Stringer: I am a member of Amicus.
Mr Martlew: I am a member of Transport
and General and the General and Municipal, and I have a flat in
Greenwich.
Mr Clelland: I am a member of Amicus.
Chairman: Gwyneth Dunwoody, ASLEF.
Mrs Ellman: Louise Ellman, member of
the Transport and General Workers' Union.
Clive Efford: I am a member of the Transport
and General Workers' Union.
Q308 Chairman: Mr Caborn, are you confident
that the arrangements for transport will meet the requirements
of the Olympics Family?
Mr Caborn: I think so. We are
trying to work through the ODA. As you probably know, the passage
of the Bill is well underway now. The report and third reading
should be hopefully later this month and inside that the ODA will
have responsibility for the Olympic transport plan. The bulk of
that was part of the chapter on transport sent to the IOC and
within that we believe it has been well thought out, costed and
is deliverable.
Q309 Chairman: You do not think there
is any danger of any confusion between the two departments?
Mr Caborn: No. We are working
extremely well together. That was well drawn down in our presentation
to the IOC when they were here, doing the evaluation. Along with
the Department for Transport and other departments and ODPM we
are working very closely together. Once the ODA is up and running,
we will be able to announce the chair of that in the next two
or three weeks. There were something like 27,000 hits on the website
for that job so it was well coveted.
Q310 Chairman: I hope they did not all
follow up with applications.
Mr Caborn: No. Hopefully, we could
get that up and running in the early part of next year and that
will be able to focus very much on the development and delivery
of the responsibility of the ODA.
Q311 Chairman: Is the Secretary of State
for Transport on the Olympic Board?
Mr Caborn: No. The composition
is that there are three shareholders, the Mayor's Office, the
government through DCMS and the British Olympic Association. In
that there are two companies. One is LOCOG which is delivering
the Games and there is the ODA which is dealing with the construction
and the transport. This was well advised when Tessa Jowell and
I visited a number of cities that had hosted Olympics. We asked
the simple question: what would you do differently if you were
to do it again? Some were very generous with the advice they gave
based upon that. Mistakes had been made and we were able to draw
together a structure that very clearly, in simple terms, had three
sets of disciplines. One, to win the Games; second, to deliver
the major construction programme including transport; third, to
deliver the Games, three distinct skill sets. We have incorporated
all of that within the structure I have just described. Over arching
the two companies, LOCOG and the ODA, there will be a programme
monitoring committee which effectively will be an early warning
system if we are off time or budget. We believe we have a very
compact, competent and focused structure to deliver the whole
project.
Q312 Chairman: Who are the Olympic Delivery
Authority and the Olympic Transport Authority accountable to?
Mr Caborn: To the Olympic Board
and, via my Secretary of State—I am on that board—back
to Parliament.
Q313 Chairman: Would it not be logical
to have the Secretary of State for Transport there with you?
Mr Caborn: On the Olympic Board?
Q314 Chairman: Yes.
Mr Caborn: I would not have thought
so because you would have every Secretary of State there as well.
It would be transport, security, the Home Office and you would
have every Secretary of State on the Olympic Board.
Q315 Chairman: Not quite. If you do not
get the Olympic transport right, you are not exactly going to
find it simple to run the Olympics, are you?
Mr Caborn: The structure I have
just outlined is one that we believe, with the professionals working
through the ODA, with responsibility for the transport plan, we
have right in terms of the quality and, in the accountability
structure, we believe we have addressed all these issues, making
sure it comes back to Parliamentary select committees of this
nature.
Q316 Graham Stringer: At the first session
we had on the Olympics we had London and Continental Railways
here and they told us that they hoped to reach an amicable agreement
with the London Development Agency about land over which they
have development rights. Recently we have read in The Evening
Standard that those talks have broken down. Is that the case?
Mr Caborn: No. Those talks never
broke down. In the report at third reading of the Olympic Bill
which will come before Parliament hopefully in the next few weeks,
there are a number of land issues coming out of the woodwork.
There is an issue on allotments which has been a difficulty. We
have also found a covenant that says you cannot build sports facilities,
which was not very helpful. Part of the amendments we are putting
into the Olympic Bill will have to deal with land and there is
also the problem that Mr Stringer has referred to. You cannot
serve a CPO on Crown land. That land was owned by the Department
for Transport and therefore there have been discussions with LCR
through the LDA to come to an amicable arrangement.
Q317 Chairman: Do you think we could
have fewer initials?
Mr Caborn: The London Development
Agency has the responsibility at the moment to negotiate on land
issues with London and Continental Railways, who are main owners
of that chunk of land at Stratford. What we are in the process
of doing is to move that land from Crown to English Partnerships.
You could then serve a CPO but I can assure Mr Stringer that as
late as four o'clock last night the LDA and the LCR had just about
come to an agreement. The best way forward for all parties here
is to have an agreement and I am very hopeful that that will be
arrived at, probably in the next 24 hours.
Q318 Graham Stringer: The consortium
leader of London and Continental said he was shocked, amazed and
deeply disappointed and went on to describe the actions of the
LDA as being incomprehensible, in a press statement. That position
has been modified, has it?
Mr Caborn: There is always a difficulty
when one starts negotiating through the columns of the press.
These are very sensitive land issues and the less they are seen
through the press the better. I do not know about that particular
comment. All I know is a bit of goodwill has been shown and the
political will and I hope, in the next 24 hours, it will be resolved.
Q319 Graham Stringer: Can you describe
to us what is going to happen? As I understood what you said,
the Department for Transport is going to sell or pass over the
land to English Partnerships. Is that right?
Mr Caborn: That is one solution
but if the LDA come to agreement with LCR then the agreement will
be a voluntary agreement between the LDA and the LCR.
| 
