Examination of Witnesses (Questions 5440
- 5459)
5440. I think it might be helpful if I say a
little bit about the way in which I suggest it would be helpful
for us to proceed. In a moment, we are going to hear Mr Kenneth
Cork, and after that I would suggest, for the benefit of those
Petitioners who only decided this morning to be with us, Ms Lieven,
if we hear from you to briefly respond to some of the issues raised
by the Petitioners. It gives them an indication of the issues
you might wish your witnesses to respond to later on. I would
then seek to hear Mr Welfare on behalf of the other Petitioners
and then give some guidance as to which witnesses might be helpfully
heard.
5441. Ms Lieven: Chairman, when you said
I respond, you did really mean I respond?
5442. Chairman: Yes, that would be helpful.
That is so you can give us some indication of the areas in which
to explore with your witnesses later. That is to enable those
Petitioners who have been here just this morning to get some appreciation
of what might be covered later in the day. That is giving you
some warning of that. In which case, let us proceed to Mr Cork.
The Petition of Mr Kenneth Cork.
The Petitioner appeared in person.
5443. Mr Cork: Thank you for hearing
my Petition and listening to us. My name is Kenneth Cork. I am
Petitioning on behalf of myself and my wife. I am a self-employed
professional accountant. I live at 26 Herington Grove in a four-bedroom
house situated on Hutton Mount Estate. It is adjacent to the rail
track car park off Mount Avenue and we are right opposite the
works that are being carried out.
5444. I am a self-employed accountant, and I
do work from home. I agree with most of the points raised by the
other Petitioners so far, and I hope so far you are impressed
by the strength of their opinions. What I am about to say is not
a complete list of the queries and comments, but some of the things
that I think are important and which perhaps other people are
not raising.
5445. Shenfield and Hutton is a prosperous well-educated
area with a strong business community. I can attest for that because
I am an accountant and I work with these people locally. There
is a mainline station and a shopping centre to be proud of. It
is, in short, one of the best places to live in the South East
of England. It is also a commuter area where many travel to the
City and many influential business people live in the area. I
am concerned that the proposed levels of site works, and the extended
time period for the works, may ruin Shenfield forever. I am not
sure that I will be able to continue to live and work there during
the construction period.
5446. I wish to emphasise the frustration of
the people of Shenfield and Hutton who feel that they have lost
their democratic rights to protest about Crossrail and the use
of Shenfield as the terminus.
5447. The original plans for work at Shenfield
Station were minor, mainly being an extension of the platform.
Some of the last amended plans to be issued by Crossrail related
to Shenfield, including a new platform, extending a platform and
an additional rail close to houses and shops. This was to be done
by utilising half of the car parking spaces at Shenfield, the
building sites, creating havoc for one to two years.
5448. Because of a slight of hand by Crossrail,
the delay of the publication of drastically amended plans very
late in the day and seemingly the council and MPs taking their
time to pick up what was happening, a public meeting was not called
to disseminate the plans to the public until far too late in the
day to effect a sufficiently major objection from the public.
5449. We have been told that if we Petitioned
we could have our democratic say in disputing the details of the
plans and propose that the line be truncated at Stratford.
5450. The Bill was then published including
Shenfield as the terminus in the name of the Bill. We are now
told that because Shenfield is in the name of the Bill, the terminus
cannot be changed, although the Transport Minister promised in
the House that we could make full objections, including the truncation
of Stratford via Petitions to the Bill.
5451. We all spent hours and hours on our Petitions.
I think there were 48 from Brentwood. We were advised that we
can make our points about the truncation of the line at Stratford
to the Select Committee and they will listen politely. However,
we were advised that the Select Committee have not been given
any powers to make any recommendations to change the route. The
people of Hutton and Shenfield feel very angry and completely
let down by the parliamentary process. Given our democratic rights,
we could make a substantial case for the truncation of the line
at Stratford or shortly after that on the line. We have never
been given our democratic rights to put our cases forward. We
would beseech the Select Committee to consider the position and
consider righting of the wrong or requesting powers to recommend
amendments to the route if they feel this is the right course.
Obviously that would be up to you and whether you felt that we
had made our case.
5452. The construction works at Shenfield are
to be carried out over an expensive period and it is feared that
the impact on Shenfield will be destructive and a great burden.
We are talking about extensive works for a year to two years from
8.00 pm to 6.00 pm. It is then feared that the relaying of the
track will take place when the line is not being used, presumably
at night, so we could be faced with an almost round clock situation.
Many people will be re-housed for up to three months and a great
deal more will need to have their houses and shops insulated.
Half the car parking space in Shenfield will be utilised as construction
sites for up to two years. Approximately two years ago there was
an uproar from the business community in Shenfield—this
is very important—and this happened when paid-parking was
introduced. There is a constant parking problem in Shenfield and
the changes led to businesses suffering from loss of business
and the outcome led to a change in the control of the council.
5453. The destruction of the parking system
will be nothing to losing half of all the car parking space in
the two municipal car parks, plus the vibration, the noise, the
dust and the traffic jams. I wonder if Shenfield as we know it
will continue to exist, I really think it may not. I think a lot
of those shops may be closed. It is a very unusual centre. I cannot
stress it more. It should be preserved and it should not be destroyed.
5454. The personal impact on my own house: originally
not listed at all, but my neighbour's house was listed twice both
for re-housing and noise insulation. Now we are told that we should
be listed for noise insulation, but I still dispute that they
have got that right. The point of me saying that is to say that
in so many things in the original rail track proposals were wrong.
There were so many errors and yet they are talking about destroying
our lives. Surely they should get it right.
5455. Please examine all the work to be carried
out in Shenfield in depth. Is it necessary to build a separate
platform? Why can alternative car parking not be provided? Please
limit any necessary work to a minimum.
5456. I contend that the main reason for Crossrail
is to help decongest London and not congest Shenfield. I can see
little or no reason for containing the line from Stratford to
Shenfield. This is of no benefit to the people of Shenfield or
most of the people of the other stations in between. We are happy
with our current system, it works well. If we want to go anywhere,
we get a fast train to London and change. You learn that very
quickly if you go to work in London. You do not catch a slow train,
it is far too ponderous a situation. All of the Crossrail trains
will be slower trains stopping at every station. To use Crossrail
will take longer. To go across London, it is my understanding
that you will have to change. I noticed the brief at the beginning
said that you could catch a train at Shenfield and go right the
way across. I would like clarification of that because there was
something in the original notes which suggested changing near
Whitechapel. People are not sure because I asked a number of people
earlier. It may be right, but I would like clarification.
5457. It is difficult to see any real benefits
for anyone passing through Stratford. Rather than building a depot
at Romford, why not consider using Northpole near Paddington to
be vacated by Eurostar or Old Oak Common and switch the Heathrow
trains to Northpole. If the Romford depot is not necessary, it
undermines the whole costing structure of the extension line to
Shenfield. The cost of the depot that could be saved, I am told,
I cannot be sure of this, is something like £500 million.
Apart from all the costs of extending all the platforms all the
way up from Liverpool Street right down to Shenfield, it is all
the disruption at every station in the form that it is. No one
would lose out service-wise if the Crossrail extension from Stratford
was cancelled and time and money could be saved. Also, I am concerned
about the cost and finance aspect of the project.
5458. The size of the project and that of the
Olympic Games means that it is unlikely that both projects could
be carried out simultaneously. Crossrail would be delayed and
this could well have the effect of blighting house prices and
undermining businesses in Shenfield on a long-term basis. I am
talking about perhaps ten years. It is necessary or sensible?
Are there alternatives? In personal terms, my main asset is my
home. I am 61 at the present and if Crossrail is delayed and not
finished until 2014, which is a possibility, my house will be
probably blighted until 2014 and I will be 70. I do not consider
that fair or right. I think those are my main points. Thank you
very much for listening.
5459. Chairman: Thank you, Mr Cork. Again,
in case it is not entirely clear, can I make a few remarks about
the whole question of the Shenfield terminus. As I hope is clear,
the instructions from the House of Commons were very clear to
the Committee. We do not have the power to change the Shenfield
terminus. When the additional instructions were agreed by the
House in January, some scope was given to us for consideration
of alternatives at other terminals, but not for the Shenfield
terminus. That is probably well known to the Petitioners. As Mr
Cork has indicated, the Committee can listen to the arguments.
| 
