Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1040
- 1059)
1040. It leaves me to perhaps suggest that of
course there is no question about the desirability of Crossrail,
we would not be here had not the Commons already accepted the
desirability of Crossrail and the desirability of it as a matter
of principle. I would suggest that beyond that there are some
other things that the Committee are unlikely to need to be convinced
of that. I think we are unlikely to need to be convinced of that,
the importance of the continued viability of the City. I hope
it goes without saying that is something that is shared by all
Members of the Committee as it is by both the Promoter and the
Petitioners.
1041. I think it is also unlikely that we will
need any persuasion at all of the need for it to remain an attractive
place in which to work. I am sure that is accepted by both the
Promoter and Petitioners. Indeed, arising from that, there is
no need for us either to be persuaded of the need for it to continue
to be perceived as an attractive place in which to invest. I do
not think we will need to have further demonstrated to us that
there are a wide range of ambitious planning policies to ensure
that it continues to remain such an attractive place to work and
such an attractive place to invest.
1042. I do not think we will need any further
convincing either that there is a reasonable hope and expectation
of continued significant investment in the City and that arising
from that continued and significant investment in the City there
is likely to be a continuation of significant growth of numbers
employed in the area of the City. I think those are things that
we, as a Committee, are likely to accept very readily if we have
not done so already.
1043. I do not think the Committee, having seen
Liverpool Street and many of us having travelled through it on
many occasions, is likely to need to be convinced that there is,
in more general terms, desirability for significant improvement
of the Liverpool Street complex.
1044. I think what is interesting to us and
what we are charged with looking at is the impact of Crossrail
in general, but most particularly when we are looking at this
Petition the impact of Crossrail on the Liverpool Street complex.
1045. Secondly, I am sure we want to direct
our attention to what is necessary in terms of modification to
the Liverpool Street complex as a result of the impact of Crossrail
on the station.
1046. It is also my understanding of what we
are charged with doing on behalf of the Commons, the Commons having
accepted the principle of the Crossrail Bill and supported it
in principle, is to look on their behalf at what alternatives
are necessary, what alternatives are possible and what alternatives
are reasonable to the proposals put forward by the Petitioners,
in this particular context to the Liverpool Street complex.
1047. I hope those remarks are helpful. I hope
that counsel, both for the Petitioners and for the Promoter, will
bear them in mind as they prepare for the evidence in the remainder
of this week and, indeed, the time to come.
1048. Mr Laurence: Sir, the first thing
to say is that is extremely helpful, it really is. The second
thing is to ask you something that I would have asked even if
you had not said what you have just done. Mr Spencer, who is due
to arrive at any minute with, I hope, copies of his exhibits—
1049. Sir Peter Soulsby: Right on cue!
1050. Mr Laurence: You are obviously
assuming that nobody had tipped me off that he was walking down
the corridor, Sir. Mr Spencer has a proof of evidence which does
go, amongst other things, into the numbers in some considerable
detail. I pointed out before that it is the case that in order
that there should be an intellectually coherent and honest presentation
of the position. There is no escaping that there is some degree
of grappling with the numbers. Mr Weiss has taken that process
only halfway; Mr Spencer is going to complete the process, with
your leave, tomorrow.
1051. The practical suggestion that I was about
to make to you, Sir, and I am not necessarily asking for a ruling
on it now, is simply this: provided Mr Spencer is happy to do
so, and I think he probably is, would it help the Committee if
we were to put not merely his exhibits in front of you but also
his proof of evidence and for me to issue to the Committee an
invitation I have issued in the past, and been given an affirmative
answer to, which is that the Committee would be prepared to treat
that evidence as having been given although it would not have
been uttered orally.
1052. Sir Peter Soulsby: I am very attracted
by the idea, Mr Laurence, but I am advised that of course it may
be that in some way that disadvantages other counsel who may wish
to cross-examine. Would you like to comment on that, Mr Elvin?
1053. Mr Elvin: As long as we get a copy
of it, it cannot disadvantage us to see in advance what we would
be hearing orally in any event.
1054. Sir Peter Soulsby: It sounds like
a note of agreement.
1055. Mr Elvin: I hope we are all quids
in if that happens because this allows us to focus on the main
points and (a) we do not have to go through it in enormous detail
orally, which I am sure we would all be glad of, and (b) you may
find the cross-examination of Mr Spencer is rather narrower than
you may be fearing. I have been looking through his new figures
which we were given this morning and we have already tested on
figures higher than his new figures.
1056. Mr Laurence: I hope Mr Elvin will
keep his remarks of a forensic nature for when it is his turn
to make them! I had thought the party towards whom you might be
solicitation was not Mr Elvin, who can look after himself, but
to those of my witnesses who have not so far had the same opportunity,
eg—I do not know what he would say to the question—
r Penfold himself who may feel that it would be desirable that
the Committee see what it was that he would have said had Mr Cameron
had the opportunity to ask him in full. I am sure Mr Weiss would
be happy with his evidence as it is because it reads so attractively.
I am not sure what Mr Rees' position would be. Can we just make
our own inquiries about this overnight, Sir, and ask you tomorrow
if we think that the same facility should be accorded to those
other witnesses?
1057. Sir Peter Soulsby: I think that
would be very sensible for us to give some consideration to what
has been suggested to us overnight and come to a view on this
in the morning.
1058. Mr Elvin: Sir, before you do so
can I just say one thing about you receiving material from witnesses
who have already spoken. We have had no opportunity to cross-examine
on it, we have not seen it, and I would therefore resist that
suggestion. If you want me to expand on it, I will do it tomorrow
morning.
1059. Sir Peter Soulsby: I would have
anticipated that response. Thank you very much indeed.
| 
