Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-58)
MR OWEN
WHALLEY, MR
NEIL BULLEN,
MS JANE
MANDLIK, MR
JOHN HERMAN,
MR ANDREW
CUNNINGHAM, MR
MILES BUTLER
AND MR
STEPHEN JOSEPH
19 OCTOBER 2005
Q40 Mr Leech: How does that compare with
the population in that area?
Mr Butler: The resident population
of Weymouth and Portland is 60,000 people. Of course, this event
will take place at the height of the summer season when the population
of Weymouth increases by 15,000-20,000 people in terms of people
staying in Weymouth, and in terms of day visitors the population
of Weymouth will double on a peak day in August.
Q41 Chairman: Before we move on I do
want to bring you back to this question of construction because
I do not think we have really gone into that deeply enough. Do
you have concerns about the transport of construction waste?
Mr Herman: Yes, I think it is
fair to say we do, and it is one of the topics that is the subject
of one of the accompanying strategies that the LDA are required
to submit as a consequence of the planning consent that they have.
It is under discussion with the LDA. In relation to the Olympics
as a single project, it is manageable but the reality is that
it will not be a single project; it will be in an area where there
are a lot of other things going on. What we have not yet done
enough on in my view is linking up the impact of those other projects.
Q42 Chairman: Is there any element of
provision for the transport of construction waste by river?
Mr Herman: Yes. Studies have been
done on both river and rail transport for construction material
in and waste out. As I said, the rail looks marginal; the water
does not look a viable proposition, but that is only in the context
of looking at the Olympics in isolation. We and the LDA are currently
looking at how those economics might change when you take on the
group effect of the other projects under way, and we are also
trying to look at some novel contracting arrangements for shared
use of those depot and wharfage facilities.
Q43 Chairman: So you are certainly not
ruling out water?
Mr Herman: No, definitely not.
Q44 Mr Leech: You said water did not
seem viable. Are you talking about financially viable?
Mr Herman: Yes.
Q45 Mr Leech: Surely from a nuisance
point of view using water would be far better?
Mr Herman: The issue is that the
rivers in that part of the world are tidal and there is a very
small window of opportunity when you can get barge traffic in
and out and that makes the management of waste quite difficult
to handle.
Q46 Chairman: I want to ask you about
the concerns of any community groups on the effects of construction.
Are you aware that there is any problem or any misgiving?
Mr Herman: No particular issues
have come our way yet but it is very early days and we are very
conscious that that is likely to be an area of great concern.
Newham has set out or is setting out a proposal for a significant
amount of activity around community engagement in relation to
the Games, both in terms of positive and negative aspects of the
Games, and we will not really know what those impacts are and
how they can be managed until we have got more understanding around
how the construction practice is going to be operated as the first
contracts are let and we can talk to the contractors about how
they are managing their work sites, hours of operation, haulage
routes, dust control and so on.
Q47 Graham Stringer: Within the overall
surface transport arrangements to get to the Games what special
facilities or priorities have been made available for IOC members
and some of the athletes?
Mr Joseph: Probably the Olympic
delivery authority can answer that more directly. As I understand
it, there are special buses put on for them and they will be running
on special bus lanes, etc. They are isolated from the rest of
the spectators going to the Games and we have got a very viable,
deliverable plan to do that, but we are not experts on that.
Q48 Graham Stringer: But presumably,
if you are taking part of the road space out and giving priority
to VIPs, that will have an impact on the rest of the transport
plans?
Ms Mandlik: Greenwich has already
been in discussion with consultants on establishing these routes
for the Olympic family, including the VIPs, to get to the events,
and we have advised them on certain changes where we can offer
a lane, so we can use a dual carriageway as opposed to a two-lane
highway. There will be quite a lot of discussions closer to the
time on precise routes that can be protected but also, in getting
between venues, we are talking about quite a short slot. You will
get between venues in about an hour, so even though a lane may
be taken up it will not have a day-long impact. I can see that
the police, as we do for other events like the London Marathon,
would have a rolling closure so that roads would open up as the
cavalcade passes by and therefore the impact would be minimised.
Obviously, the Blackwall Tunnel is a sensitive one and, as Mr
Herman said earlier, if the Thames Gateway Bridge was brought
forward in any way that would give us quite lot of protection
on that particular aspect.
Q49 Graham Stringer: When you talk about
the Olympic family you are talking primarily about the IOC members
and administrators, are you?
Ms Mandlik: And press and VIPs,
as I understand it.
Q50 Graham Stringer: Are you saying that
through the Olympic Games many of the events will be taking place
at the same time? If they are taking place at the same time and
you have got part of the road reserved for VIPs, you surely are
not going to say, "You can only travel between these events
when one finishes and one starts", are you?
Ms Mandlik: As yet we have got
very little information as to the timing of events but, as boroughs
that have held events like Greenwich where the Millennium Exhibition
was held and where we have the London Marathon running through
every year, and the Olympic torch route came through a number
of boroughs, we are quite good at and have quite a lot of experience
in working with the police on those sorts of issues.
Q51 Graham Stringer: But we are talking
about an event that will last for three weeks and you are going
to take what I imagine would be a considerable amount of road
space out of that. I am surprised you have not estimated what
impact that will have on traffic flows through your boroughs.
Ms Mandlik: Again, and I am speaking
from a Greenwich perspective, as I must, until we get the times
of the events happening in Greenwich, and we have about five events,
we cannot do that, but the one happening by the Dome will have
almost a negligible impact in terms of what it does to the highway
because spectators will not be using the highway network to get
to the event and most routes in Greenwich to the events will be
on dual carriageway where we will be able to give over a lane
for the short period of getting the people to the events. We are
talking about a limited number of events and at times that probably,
when we think of when the events will occur to coincide with maximum
peak television viewing time, may not have a major impact on the
highway, bearing in mind that our highways are at capacity at
peak but there is a lot of slack at other times of the day.
Q52 Chairman: You do rather seem to be
assuming that God is going to be in your corner. I am not sure
that is always the case, is it? Can I ask you about the Blackwall
Tunnel? I go to sleep each night with a mantra that says, "And
one lane of Blackwall Tunnel is closed". I do sometimes think
it is never open. It is not something I know personally. If that
is the situation, if it is closed so frequently for maintenance
now, what plans do you have for it over the next period, particularly
when you have got this degree of traffic?
Ms Mandlik: The precise details
are a matter for TfL because they manage the Blackwall Tunnel,
but what you have experienced is planned maintenance as you go
through and, again, the maintenance can be planned to the days
that the Olympic family are not travelling through. At the moment
the newer tunnel, the southbound tunnel, is being relined. That
work will be complete within the next year or so, I imagine, so
we will not be experiencing as many closures.
Q53 Chairman: I am going to be a bit
mean and come back to Mr Stringer's point. It sounds very much
as if you are assuming that there will not be too much dovetailing
of events, that there will always be an element of flexibility
because they will not be going on at the same time. Surely that
is not the case?
Mr Cunningham: The councils so
far have done some work with Transport for London in looking at
the problems of transporting officials or athletes and part of
it will be where there will be temporary lanes that are set aside,
especially where there are dual carriageways. You can set a lane
aside for a specific time. My understanding from the discussions
Hackney have had is that a lot of the journeys will occur at a
certain time before the event when all the competitors are going
to a particular event, and again at a certain time after the event,
so they can be done on an effective basis, although I accept that
there will be some flow of these people through the rest of the
time. Where you have not got dual carriageways, what I believe
Transport for London are looking at is a system where they can
prioritise the flow of traffic along the major roads through controlling
the traffic signals. I understand they have done some work on
that although at the moment I do not know the full details, and
that is something that will need to be worked up in a lot more
detail nearer the time when we know what the current traffic flow
levels are.
Q54 Mr Scott: I would like to go back
to something you raised earlier, Chairman, regarding the consultation
with community groups. You said that there had not been any problems
you were aware of. Are you engaging with community groups to take
forward and maybe pre-empt problems to stop them from happening?
Mr Herman: Yes. Over the next
two, three, four, five years we plan extensive engagement with
our local communities, not just in relation to coping with the
construction impact but also to make sure that people are engaged
in relation to employment and the cultural aspects of the programme
as it rolls out, and indeed we are trying to encourage healthy
lifestyles and participation in sport. In the case of Newham we
plan a pretty extensive programme of community engagement through
our local strategic partnership.
Q55 Mr Scott: When are you looking to
commence that?
Mr Herman: We have already commenced
in a sense because we had over 25,000 (over ten%) of the borough's
population sign up personally and endorse the bid process, so
we have been working with our communities through the bid process.
That is all positives and we do not know enough yet about what
the negative impacts might be but we are starting that engagement
process as information comes to us.
Chairman: Come to Newham and get fit!
Q56 Mr Wilshire: I want to go back to
the point, Mr Butler, that you were making. You are one of 16
venues outside the main area, as I understand it. Are you co-operating
in working with the others to develop any sort of collective voice?
Mr Butler: That is a good point.
At the moment we are not. We are the only whole event that is
being held outside Greater London, if I can call it that. Certainly
there are many other venues. Probably none of them is going to
have anything quite on the scale that we will have in Weymouth
and Portland, but it is a very good point and we ought perhaps
to touch base with others to ensure that we are speaking with
one voice.
Q57 Mr Wilshire: But, given the glittering
array you are up against here this afternoon, it suggests to me
that, in order to make yourselves heard, if you did get together
you would stand a better chance than one at a time. The other
question I want to ask you is this. The sums of money being talked
about elsewhere would make your councillors' eyes water. If you
do get investment in your transport infrastructure do you see
it as additional money or do you anticipate that it is going to
come out of your general allocations and therefore that other
investments in areas like yours will suffer because of the demands
of the Olympics at Weymouth?
Mr Butler: The major scheme involves
the primary route into Weymouth and the park-and-ride and the
transport systems that support that. That, as I say, is an LTP
major bid. It has been provisionally accepted by the Department
for Transport. However, coming back to the point about construction
costs, and particularly construction cost inflation, this is something
we are extremely worried about because I can see that the work
that was needed for preparing for the Olympics in London is going
to suck up a lot of the capacity out of the construction industry.
We are very concerned that already higher rates of construction
cost inflation are going to get higher still. There is an issue
that this committee ought to be mindful of, which is the increasing
costs, particularly to the public purse, of the higher rates of
construction cost inflation and the need for the Department for
Transport to be thinking about significantly higher amounts of
money in LTP schemes such as ours to ensure that the projects
will be completely delivered.
Q58 Mr Wilshire: But in accepting these
schemes you have put forward is it going to be an additional scheme
over and above your normal bids or is it going to be your normal
allocation for a number of years, which means you have no other
money or less money for other projects?
Mr Butler: I think certain elements
of it can only be delivered if there is additional money. The
amount of activity that has been supported through the normal
LTP allocations is relatively small compared to the job that needs
to be done, and certainly the major scheme has to be dealt with
as a Department for Transport major.
Chairman: Thank you very much, Mr Butler.
Gentlemen and madam, you have been very helpful. We have, I am
sure, lots of questions that we will be asking ourselves. We may
even come back to you, who knows? Thank you very much for coming
this afternoon.
| 
