2600. CHAIRMAN: No, you have to call evidence, not letters, you have to call people who are experts to come and give evidence to this Select Committee. Is that what you want to do? You will have to have a Certificate of alternative development which would be the basis of the valuation of 10 Hayne Street, which you have not got. You would have to have evidence about the valuation of the property on the basis of that supposed development. You would have to have figures for the costs that have been incurred because that would allow it to be awarded, but when are you going to call this evidence?

  2601. MR SAUNDERSON: I am happy for a date to be fixed in accordance with your Lordships' sittings.

  2602. CHAIRMAN: Unfortunately the City of London have got to issue the Certificate of alternative development and you have not applied for one, have you?

  2603. MR SAUNDERSON: No.

  2604. CHAIRMAN: How long do you think it would take before we could get that document from them?

  2605. MR SAUNDERSON: I have no idea, but in my submission I would provide the planning permission which has been accepted as the basis of that.

  2606. CHAIRMAN: This Select Committee has got to go back to the House and say what the conclusions are as a result of our deliberations and the Petitions. We cannot wait forever for you to acquire a Certificate of alternative development and then start calling evidence in order to value the land. There is clearly a real difficulty with this. I will leave it in your hands. Ms Lieven, we do not need to hear Mr Smith.

  2607. MS LIEVEN: Certainly, my Lord.

  2608. LORD YOUNG OF NORWOOD GREEN: I have just ploughed my way through the Register of Undertakings and I cannot see this one listed.

  2609. MS LIEVEN: It is not, my Lord, no.

  2610. LORD YOUNG OF NORWOOD GREEN: I just wanted to confirm that.

  2611. MS LIEVEN: It was one of the points I was going to deal with in my closing, but if I touch on it now. It is not listed as an undertaking because so far as the assurance I gave that if a blight notice was served in accordance with what I said in the House of Commons, we would not serve a counter-notice, in other words, we would accept the blight notice. That was discharged by the time the Register was drawn up and there was no other undertaking given to Mr Saunderson. We gave no undertaking relevant to valuation.

  2612. CHAIRMAN: There is still a valid acceptance of the blight notice?

  2613. MS LIEVEN: The blight notice was accepted in February 2007, that is what we told the Commons we would do and that is what we did.

  2614. CHAIRMAN: And that stands?

  2615. MS LIEVEN: And that stands, but as it is discharged, it did not get on to the Register. That is why that is not on the Register. We gave no other assurance. However you interpret my words or the transcript of what was said before the Commons, what it plainly is not is any undertaking about the level of valuation, so even if we said we would buy the property within X months, which we did not, but even if that is what we meant to say, that was not saying what level of valuation we would accept, so that was a dispute which was plainly still outstanding.

  2616. There is one other matter of clarification I think I should deal with which is the question of fees. We will pay, as I said in the Commons, his reasonable fees. When it comes to the Lands Tribunal, the normal rule, as I am sure my Lord Colville knows, is that the promoting authority, the compulsory acquirer pays the person being acquired fees unless the authority makes an offer which is in excess of what the Lands Tribunal awards.

  2617. CHAIRMAN: A sealed offer.

  2618. MS LIEVEN: Yes, it is called in the trade a sealed offer. If we beat the sealed offer, so we offer more—

  2619. LORD YOUNG OF NORWOOD GREEN: Sorry, who is the authority, I have got a bit lost?