KHOODEELAAR! No "to Crossrail hole plot WASTE" and KHOODEELAAR! analysis is VINDICATED in Boris Johnson's piece in the EVENING STANDARD, London

This page was last edited at 2340 GMT London Thursday 4 September 2008


THE FOLLOWING is Boris Johnson's piece in the London EVENING STANDARD Thursday 4 September 2008
"
Today's fare package is designed to
be as bearable as possible for the
London travelling public.
We are extending the Freedom Pass to
make it a 24-hour service, so that over-
sixties will travel free round the clock on
the buses, Tube, trams and Docklands
Light Railway. We are actually cutting
some Oyster fares to bring them in line
with national rail, so that off-peak
travellers to and from the outer boroughs
will benefit.
We are delivering a new and sustainable
half-price deal for those on income
support so that the poorest can travel
cheaply on the buses and trams. We are
making £1.6 billion savings in Transport
for London's budget to reduce our
demands on the fare box.
And in so far as we now have to put up
fares, the increase - at inflation as
measured by the Retail Prices Index (RPI)
plus one per cent - is much less than in
the rest of the UK and many national rail
fares. But as I look at the finances of TfL,
I know that it is the only responsible
course.
We face soaring fuel bills. We must
finance investments in infrastructure
projects vital for London's long-term
future. Above all, we must repair the
damage left by the last Mayor, who
flagrantly and cynically manipulated fares
for electoral purposes - and it is time to
expose the truth.
With his characteristic braggadocio, Ken
Livingstone has left a £2.25 billion black
hole in TfL's finances - and all because he
didn't have the guts to be straight with
the voters.
Our story begins in early June last year
when TfL was called to the Treasury to
discuss the funding of Crossrail. Ever
since Gordon Brown became Prime
Minister, he identified Crossrail as an
important way in which he could signal his
commitment to London and dispel the
impression that he was a skinflint Scot
with no interest in Southern England.
Livingstone was also determined to
ensure the scheme went ahead - as an
important plank of his re-election platform
- and so he readily agreed a huge chunk
of Crossrail funding should come from
TfL. How would TfL finance the
borrowing? It was obvious from that very
first meeting that fares on London
transport would have to go up by RPI plus
one per cent. That is the usual rate of
fare increases in London, and at a TfL
board meeting in October, chaired by the
last Mayor, it was agreed that RPI plus
one was the way to go.
TfL officials went ahead and produced a
business plan for Crossrail and other
projects, based on RPI plus one. Imagine
their consternation, therefore, when the
election started to draw nearer, and the
Mayor departed radically from the script.
They could hardly believe their ears.
Was this the same Mayor who had
chaired the very meeting that had agreed
RPI plus one? Here he was, assuring the
Greater London Assembly that he would
enact a fares increase of only RPI.
Protracted over 10 years from 2007 to
2017, that was a financial nightmare for
TfL. It meant a cut in funding of £2.25
billion, and placed a question mark over
the financing of Crossrail. "We were
struggling with a business plan saying one
thing, and the Mayor was saying
another," one senior TfL official said.
In other words, Livingstone was up to the
oldest trick in his book: recklessly
promising to hold down fares in the run-
up to an election, when he knew full well
that it was not a promise he could
conceivably keep. He had done it before,
of course - promising to cut fares before
the 2004 elections, and then ruthlessly
whacking them up when the electorate
had fallen for his bait.
TfL officials sent emails to the Mayor,
pointing out the discrepancy and
expressing the hope that he might
remember the meeting he had himself
chaired. Their interventions were in vain.
Livingstone's political team was already in
a state of panic about the polls. In
September they had even insisted on a
cut in bus fares, placing yet more strain
on TfL's finances. That was why he
insisted on RPI - or at least he would
insist on it in the run-up to the election -
and that is the Livingstone legacy I now
inherit.
I believe today's package is sensible. I will
be looking for more savings from TfL to
prevent unnecessary rises in the future.
But I will not attempt to abuse the system
and pull the wool over the eyes of
Londoners in the hope of short-term
electoral gain.

"