Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 172)
WEDNESDAY 17 OCTOBER 2007
MR ROGER
EVANS
Q160 Clive Efford: So what is your
interpretation of s.210 of the GLA Act, which seems to forbid
the public sector from operating an Infraco?
Mr Evans: I am not a lawyer and
I did not write the Act, but my understanding is that there is
the possibility that contracts could be effectively undesignated
so they were no longer PPP contracts, and that would enable the
pubic sector to operate the Act. We had a question time session
with the Mayor this morning and I asked him about this. He told
us he felt the Secretary of State would be amenable to that happening.
Q161 Clive Efford: How should the
£900 million loan that TfL has made to Metronet's administrators
be financed?
Mr Evans: Ideally, that and any
other bills that are picked up from this should be financed from
the national Government's coffers rather than through Transport
for London.
Q162 Clive Efford: You are not aware
of any changes TfL has made to its forward programme as a result
of having to find this money?
Mr Evans: They have assured us
that their programme of works has not been altered. I think the
Mayor has said the station refurbishment programme may fall back
in order to do this, but nothing else has been sacrificed.
Q163 Graham Stringer: Have you had
any indication of the Government's position on the costs due to
the failure of Metronet?
Mr Evans: No.
Q164 Mrs Ellman: There has been this
major financial and operational collapse and you say there is
no reason why you should have known about it. What other powers
do you think you should have had or you would like so that you
might be in a position of knowing in the future?
Mr Evans: I think a power we would
like to have as a committee generally is to be able to vet and
approve the Mayor's transport strategy for London, which is a
huge area and would take into account a lot of issues which are
important to Londoners. But remember we are a scrutiny committee,
we are not a part of the executive here, although we occupy the
same building as them. I think you said earlier it is not your
job to micro-manage the Underground. I do not think it is our
job to do it either.
Q165 Chairman: Mr O'Toole, I think,
told you that £17 million a week was being paid for the loan
to both Metronet and Infracos. Can I just get it plain in my own
mind exactly what it is you are saying? You believe that even
though that was an arrangement which was entered into by Transport
for London, even though it is directly involved in a London infrastructure
project it should be paid from the national purse?
Mr Evans: We believe the PPP is
something which was imposed on London in opposition to the views
of the Mayor, who was elected at the time and Londoners should
not pick up the cost.
Q166 Chairman: Is your committee
of the opinion it should not have been imposed and that we should
still have them all within national control? Is that the position
of the committee?
Mr Evans: No, the position of
the committee was that we would wait to see what actually developed
and how it worked at the time. Obviously, I have a committee which
does not just involve the three major parties, we have Greens
and people formerly known as UKIP as well, so there is quite a
wide range of views there.
Q167 Chairman: Full of life's rich
pattern. All I am asking you is what you view your responsibility
as. You say you are a scrutiny committee. That is what we are,
but we are also part of the Parliament which decides how much
money is going to be spent on which particular heading at least
once a year, sometimes twice if we are feeling violently enthusiastic!
All I am saying to you is, are you really saying to us, "We
didn't have anything to do with it. We're just scrutinising it,
but on the whole we think you ought to pay for any gap there is
because it's not us, Guv, it's the people next door"? I only
ask. I just would like to have it on the record.
Mr Evans: Yes, it is a fair question,
and certainly I believe that because this was imposed on London
then the Government that imposed it should be the people who pick
the bill up.
Q168 Chairman: And your committee
would have opposed the imposition of this arrangement?
Mr Evans: No, we did not. We could
have made a statement at the time.
Q169 Chairman: You did not oppose
it at the time, but now you think you should have done and you
want the cash?
Mr Evans: No, I think the committee's
position was correct at the time. We did not agree to it being
imposed either. We said we would monitor what was going on because
that was our role. Please remember as well that we do not have
that role of walking downstairs and seeing what is going on.
Chairman: You have been kind enough to
explain that to us, Mr Evans, and it is because you are a scrutiny
committee and because you are asking awkward questions and because,
presumably, one of the things you scrutinise is where the Hell
that amount of money is coming from each week. It is very important
for us to know who is paying for it. It is boring, but you know
that is what elected Members do.
Q170 Graham Stringer: You were listening
to Mr Bolt's evidence earlier on?
Mr Evans: Yes.
Q171 Graham Stringer: Do you have
an answer to the question I asked Mr Bolt about what you believe
the cost to the taxpayer (whichever taxpayer) has been the failure
of Metronet?
Mr Evans: That is an interesting
question and it is one I was discussing with colleagues earlier
on. There is that notional £500 million that was possibly
spent on legal advisers and auditors, maybe. That is the figure
we have seen in the press. I cannot sit here and substantiate
it because I was not a party to that.. You might also add, of
course, the cost of the legal challenge to the scheme and the
work that was done on both sides during that process, and possible
costs of delays bringing the PPP in because of that challenge.
But then you might also look at the PPP and say, "Perhaps
there are some things where we've saved money here, based on what
could have happened before." One of the big problems has
been the quality of the asset register that London Underground
had and it does appear in hindsight no one really knew exactly
what they were taking on.
Q172 Graham Stringer: So you do not
have an answer to the question of taking the baseline being the
public sector case?
Mr Evans: No, I do not have a
ballpark figure for that. I think it would be very difficult to
calculate.
Chairman: It is very nice to have heard
you, Mr Evans. We do wish you the greatest luck with your scrutiny.
Thank you for coming.
| 
