Jubilee Line Extension (Hansard, 24 May 1993)

§ 6. Mr. Austin-Walker
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when a start will be made on construction of the Jubilee line extension.

§ Mr. Norris
Negotiations are continuing on the precise terms of the funding agreement between London Underground and the parties concerned with the financing of Canary wharf. I am hopeful that they will soon be successfully concluded.

§ Mr. Austin-Walker
Whether it is the dead hand of the Treasury or the dithering of the Prime Minister, does the Minister agree that the time to invest in our infrastructure is before we come out of recession? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that 85 per cent. of the contracts for the building of the Jubilee line are ready to go, with the prospect of between 10,000 and 30,000 jobs being created? Will he further press the Cabinet for extension of the Jubilee line to Woolwich? Will he confirm that a rail crossing of the River Thames at Woolwich could be built at a quarter of the cost of building the east London river crossing?

§ Mr. Norris
On the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question, we have, of course, made it plain that we are prepared to commence construction of the line as soon as the private sector contribution is in place. On the hon. Gentleman's point about the Woolwich crossing, he will be aware that that was extensively investigated by London Transport and the conclusion was that it should not proceed at this stage.
As for the hon. Gentleman's point about the river crossing, he will be aware that the road crossing—the east London river crossing—is of major strategic importance to London, particularly the east of London, and that it will, in due course, play a very important role in enhancing infrastructure in east London.

§ Mr. Channon
I am sure that my hon. Friend appreciates that this is a matter of very great urgency, not only for the obvious reasons that have been outlined on many occasions in the House, but because it is impossible to proceed with phase 2 of the parliamentary building programme—as the overwhelming majority of hon. Members want to do—until we know one way or the other when the Jubilee line extension is likely to take place. Will my hon. Friend bear that in mind, as it is very important and urgent?

§ Mr. Norris
I, too, understand what my right hon. Friend has said. Any delay to the start of the project is regrettable. However, my right hon. Friend will appreciate that the position that the Government have adopted has remained as it was originally. When the private sector is able to put its contribution in place, construction of the scheme can begin. It clearly cannot begin before that date.

§ Mr. Simon Hughes
Does the Minister accept that the position on the Jubilee line is absolutely unacceptable? It is 14 months since the Bill received Royal Assent; we have had promises that construction of the line was about to be announced and completed; the money has been standing by for a year; we have had rumours one week that documentation for the scheme was about to be signed and the next week that it was not; two weeks ago, the managing director of London Underground told the Transport Select Committee that the documents between London Underground and the private sector had now been agreed; and every day that passes businesses are blighted and go under. People want an underground line and they want the Government to put their hands on and 560 not take them off. The people concerned should bang their heads together and get the line agreed. Is that going to happen or not? For heaven's sake, tell us the truth.

§ Mr. Norris
I deeply resent that last suggestion. It is quite obvious that all the way through our message has been very straightforward. The Government are prepared to contribute around £1.5 billion to the project on the basis that the private sector comes forward with its own contribution of £400 million in cash. I regret the delay as much as the hon. Gentleman. He and I have debated the issue many times. We are making progress and that progress will continue. When the process is complete—and it is impossible for me or the managing director of London Underground or anyone else to set a date at this stage—we will begin construction of the line.

§ Mr. Dunn
My hon. Friend will be aware that the Jubilee line extension project will make a massive contribution to employment prospects in the centre of London. Will he confirm that he will do all he can to ensure that the project starts at the earliest opportunity? Will he also confirm that the east London crossing will remain in east London and not be shipped off to Dartford, as was suggested by my hon. Friend the Member for Eltham (Mr. Bottomley)?

§ Mr. Norris
On the first point, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer made it clear in his autumn statement that the Government are committed to their contribution towards building the Jubilee line. That substantial contribution is well in excess of £1.5 billion. As to my hon. Friend's point about the route of the east London river crossing, he will appreciate that its whole strategic importance is predicated on the assumption that it links the A406 with the A2 where it currently does.

§ Mr. Tony Banks
Surely the Minister recalls that his Department has issued more press statements on the Jubilee line extension going ahead than I have had hot dinners—and I have had one or two of those? Once again, it looks as though the Government have changed the rules. We now learn that the contracts and understandings that have been negotiated with the private sector have been changed in terms of Government requirements. Have there been any changes in Government requirements since last November with regard to deals with the private sector?
Will the Minister make it quite clear that he is not being pressurised by the Treasury into scrapping the Jubilee line extension altogether? That is what the newspapers and various people in the private sector are saying. Is not the Minister fully aware that unless the Jubilee line extension goes ahead, a large number of question marks will hang over the development in docklands, the City airport, Canary wharf and the whole of the east Thames corridor initiative?

§ Mr. Norris
I shall not swap tallies of hot dinners with the hon. Gentleman because I recognise that I might lose. I am delighted to confirm that there has been no change whatever in the Government's position. Nor is there any ground between the Department of Transport and any other Department of Government. The Government's position has been clear throughout and I will restate it for the avoidance of doubt. It is that the Government remain committed to putting money into the project once the private sector contribution is concluded and assured. I readily accept the hon. Gentleman's point about the 561 impact of the Jubilee line extension, particularly on those areas south of the Thames which stand to benefit substantially when the extension is built. I hope that a satisfactory conclusion can be arrived at so that the line can go ahead. But it must depend on the private sector contribution.

§ Sir Michael Neubert
If that is so, could I confirm from the Government Benches the intense frustration of Londoners that, six months after the announcement of the Government's commitment to the project, one of the principal purposes of the project, the creation of jobs and a recovery in the capital, is being frustrated by continued prevarication by the bankers? Is there nothing more that my hon. Friend can do to persuade them to get their act together?

§ Mr. Norris
My hon. Friend mentioned the responsibilities of some of the creditors of Olympia and York. The complexity of arriving at an agreement with the creditors of Olympia and York, which I understand was the largest property company in the world when it went into administration, was underestimated. That has necessarily meant that the process of arriving at a new arrangement has been extremely complex and hazardous. I should like to put it on the record that the Government believe that all the parties to negotiations have acted throughout in good faith. Important and difficult negotiations have taken place. I regret the delay in the creation of jobs and opportunities, but I am convinced, as I know is my hon. Friend, that it is right to press the developers, who will gain materially from the development in return for their contribution.