Proceeding contribution from Tom Harris (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 25 April 2007. It occurred during Legislative debate on Crossrail Bill [Instruction] (No. 5).
Crossrail Bill [Instruction] (No. 5)
The contingency at 35 per cent. remains a static figure as a percentage of the core costs. The savings have been made in a number of ways, such as by a review of the tunnelling strategy, and by a review of selective door opening so that existing surface-level stations might not have to be extended. There are other elements, and if the hon. Gentleman wants me to give him more details, I am happy to do so. The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the Lyons inquiry into local government funding, and I am happy to repeat what I said in the debate of 31 October. I did not expect Lyons to say anything in detail about how Crossrail will be funded. The point I made in the House on 31 October was that it would be foolish to try to construct a framework for the funding of Crossrail when we did not know at that time what the Lyons report would say about the future structure of local government funding, which would be an essential element of working out the exact structure of the Crossrail funding package. I have to disappoint the hon. Gentleman by telling him that in respect of that I will not lift the veil today. I hope that the announcement on Crossrail funding will be made in the context of the comprehensive spending review, and if he asks me for a date for that, I shall have to disappoint him again, but it will certainly be later this year. The hon. Gentleman also asked about the Thameslink box scenario. That is an important part of the debate, and I want to make it clear that I hope that, provided that the proper financial package is put in place and the necessary level of private funding is secured, there will be no gap between the building of the box and the fitting out of the box to make a station. In the ideal scenario, I hope that that is what will happen, and that it will do so at the same time as the construction of the rest of the south-east arm of Crossrail. However, let me make it clear that if Berkeley Homes and other partners pay for the construction of the box and Crossrail is then built but private finances are not forthcoming, from whatever source, that box will not become a station and it will be used instead as a ventilation and access area for that Crossrail arm. Although I am confident—as are Berkeley Homes and the London borough of Greenwich—that a deal can be reached and that the finances can be delivered, if that does not happen, money will not be forthcoming from the public purse; there will be no net increase in the amount of money that the Government are putting up to build Crossrail.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 459 c963-4
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Costs Construction Elizabeth line Crossrail Finance Greater London Infrastructure Jubilee line Railway stations Railways Railway network Woolwich Docklands Light Railway Berkeley Group Select Committee on the Crossrail Bill
- Legislation
- Crossrail Bill 2004/05 to 2005-06 to 2006-07 to 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-03-16 09:30:52 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_392556
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_392556
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_392556