Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1020
- 1039)
1020. I do not think there is anything between
us of any significance on that. The development industry, in which
you are an important player, expects to make its own contribution
towards transport infrastructure and services under current established
government planning policy and regional and local planning policy,
does it not?
(Mr Penfold) Yes, indeed.
1021. It does so through contributions in the
form of planning obligations and we saw an example of one a little
earlier in relation to the Bishopsgate site.
(Mr Penfold) Yes, it does.
1022. Mr Mould: We can see that process
being provided for in strategic policy in the Mayor's plan. This
is an extract from the plan that was circulated earlier. I think
it is number 099.[27]
Just to set the scene, Mr Penfold, we see that the Mayor's policy
for opportunity areas in East London, policy 5C.2 is referenced.
1023. Sir Peter Soulsby: Sorry to interrupt
you but I interrupted Mr Cameron earlier on perhaps a similar
point. I just have to say, and I am sure other Members of the
Committee would agree, while it is important we understand the
planning framework, it is not absolutely central to the issues
that are going to concern us when we come to deliberate on the
evidence put in front of us. I wonder if you might pass through
it very quickly.
1024. Mr Mould: Sir, I intend to. I note
the time and I do not intend to be on my feet cross-examining
Mr Penfold any longer than the next five or six minutes, if that
is helpful. Mr Penfold, the point I want to draw to your attention
is simply this: the opportunity areas policy in the London Plan
sees a particular role for planning obligations, does it not?
You can see that from policy 5C.2, the penultimate sentence.
(Mr Penfold) Yes.
1025. And would apply to the City fringe areas
that you highlighted in your evidence.
(Mr Penfold) Yes, it would.
1026. If we turn on to the third page of this
little extract, we can see a policy 6A.4[28]
which deals with priorities in planning obligations and we can
see that the Mayor sets out, amongst other things, public transport
improvements as being one of those aspects of provision that requires
the highest importance to be given to it in the context of the
development process. Do you see that?
(Mr Penfold) I do. That was reflected
in the letter that we saw on 201 Bishopsgate.
1027. Indeed so. If we turn over the page we
see in paragraph 6.22 the point is restated and reference to the
need for this to be a policy which is applied consistently throughout
London and repeated reference to its role in overcoming constraints
on the public transport system.
(Mr Penfold) Yes.
1028. The point is this, is it not, yourself
and other players in the development industry who, as you said,
are developing schemes, planning for future developments in accordance
with the planning policy framework, including the London Plan,
expect to play your part under this policy framework in contributing
to transport infrastructure needs and transport service needs
in the planning control context?
(Mr Penfold) We expect to and we already do.
210 Bishopsgate is one example. I could quote a number of others
where we have made significant contributions to public transport
infrastructure.
1029. We can see that is particularly the case
in the City fringe areas that you have mentioned and highlighted
in your evidence.
(Mr Penfold) Yes.
1030. Mr Mould: Thank you very much indeed.
1031. Sir Peter Soulsby: Mr Cameron,
before asking you whether you want to ask any further questions,
do you have any indication of how long you might take?
1032. Mr Cameron: I have got two questions
and I am very conscious, Sir, that the guillotine will come down
at half past four.
1033. Sir Peter Soulsby: It will. I would
like a few minutes before then, if you are able, in order to make
a few remarks.
Re-examined by Mr Cameron
1034. Mr Cameron: Of course, Sir. I have
two questions and I hope they will be very brief. First question:
Mr Penfold, you said you had a letter from UBS. Can I ask that
letter be produced?[29]
It was in answer to Mr Hopkins' question who asked do you have
support from other businesses. While that is going in, can I ask
the second question and then come back to the letter to save some
time. You gave an answer in which you referred to the direct link
from the City to Heathrow Airport which will be provided by Crossrail.
Do you remember that?
(Mr Penfold) I did, yes.
1035. Mr Cameron: You said perhaps it
is a matter of perception but that the entrance arrangements at
Liverpool Street were important.
(Mr Penfold) I did, yes.
1036. Mr Cameron: Mr Mould then said
to you: "You referred to perceived impacts which other colleagues
will be dealing with and I would like to ask you about this perception
point". Whose perception were you referring to?
(Mr Penfold) I was referring to the perception
of the people who work at Broadgate now and in particular the
perception of potential Broadgate and the wider City area. Apart
from our broader commitment to the City, we have a number of other
specific interests in the City which I have explained, but particularly
to the perception of potential future investors in the City and
future tenants in the City of London. I think that is important
to the City's role in the future as the heart of the World City
of London, as the financial centre of Europe and one of three
World Cities. I think that perception is something I particularly
have in mind.
1037. Mr Cameron: What difference, if
any, will be made to that perception if access to Liverpool Street
is provided through the existing ticket hall B as opposed to through
either a changed ticket hall B or a dedicated access?
(Mr Penfold) I think I used the word "extraordinary".
That is not a word I would use lightly. They would find it extraordinary.
These are people who operate all over the world and see new public
transport infrastructure being introduced into major cities in
other parts of the world and are used to it being provided to
the highest standard, and in fact we are used to that in London
now. The new public transport infrastructure that has been provided
in London is to a very high standard. If I were to take you to
Westminster Jubilee line station, or any of the Jubilee line stations,
and say, "This is what we have provided on our Jubilee Line
Extension" and then say, "This is what we are going
to provide as the main City entrance to our new £10 billion
Crossrail project", I think anybody would be surprised and
would find that extraordinary.
1038. Mr Cameron: I am going to finish
on that note. I will leave you and your Committee, Sir, to look
at the UBS letter. I hope I have not trespassed on your two minutes.
The witness withdrew
1039. Sir Peter Soulsby: Thank you very
much. I thought it might be useful to make these remarks this
evening rather than to leave them until tomorrow morning. I am
sure my colleagues on the Committee will correct me if I have
misinterpreted their feelings on this matter. I do feel that today
we have spent some considerable time on the planning framework
and we have spent some considerable time on predictions for the
future and new development proposals. I hope that is now an area
that we have explored quite fully, or sufficiently fully. I would
not want us to be going over ground that is already well ploughed.
27 Crossrail Ref: P2, The London Plan-Spatial Development
Strategy, Policy 5C.2 (LONDLB-2604-099). Back
28
Crossrail Ref: P2, The London Plan-Spatial Development Strategy,
Policy 6A.4 (LONDLB-2604-101 and 102). Back
29
Committee Ref: A15, Letter from UBS AG to Mr Adrian Penfold,
dated 18 January 2006. Back
| 
