Select Committee on Crossrail Bill Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 8120 - 8139)

  8120. But that long gap, which contrasts greatly with the gap between stations elsewhere on the line, goes through a densely populated area which needs regeneration and which could well do with a station which would help with that regeneration.
  (Mr Anderson) I think undoubtedly it would help regeneration, yes.

  8121. Mr Lidddell-Grainger: How far is Abbey Wood in miles, if possible, if there was a station at Woolwich? How far would that be? I worked it out at about 3.5 kilometres.
  (Mr Anderson) You are probably right.

  8122. So roughly two and half miles, three miles. Is one of the reasons behind it that once these trains, which are quite big and long, get up to speed it is going to be slowing down? Is that the thinking behind it? It is actually so close.
  (Mr Anderson) I am not aware that that is an important factor in the decision.

  8123. Because Abbey Wood is going to be the terminus for it. If you look at the rough spacing of these stations along the whole of the route, all the way around, they are all fairly equidistant. It just intrigues me that if you go from Abbey Wood up to Custom House and then on to the Isle of Dogs and then up to Shoreditch, Whitechapel they are all fairly equidistant, but that one would not be, that would be very, very close. There was no thinking behind it—rather like Embankment and Charing Cross—that it is too close?
  (Mr Anderson) I do not believe that was the factor.

  8124. Not at all?
  (Mr Anderson) I will take advice from my colleagues but I do not believe that was the case.

  8125. Something must have happened; if it is not to do with costs it is to do with something?
  (Mr Anderson) I think the position was that the station was not included in the scheme and the principle reason was the high capital cost. I think now we have done a lot of further work for ourselves and the borough has as well, and I think that what we see now will in turn be a matter for the Minister.

  8126. Chairman: The distance is extraordinarily long. The whole purpose of Crossrail is to get a new railway across London from one part to the other, and here you are going from Custom House and even the Isle of Dogs. How far is that? Is it about nine kilometres—five miles, six miles? How far is that from Custom House to Abbey Wood?
  (Mr Anderson) I think it is a bit less than that, sir. Perhaps the best thing is if we note down the distances for you and let you have a note on that.

  8127. It is certainly over five miles, is it not?
  (Mr Anderson) Yes. I think one is getting perhaps a slightly unfair comparison here because you have the DLR very much in the foreground here and the tube and you would expect the distances for those to be much shorter than for a national rail service.

  8128. If you go back to what we were discussing earlier, on page 19 of the Promoter's case, and all the different aspects of the decision-making factors which make up the decision, it seems to be doing nothing else but driving the railway through. It does not seem to be anything to do with sustainability of population communities of anything else, or regeneration, it just seems to be driving the railway.
  (Mr Anderson) Sir, I do not think that is the case. The strategic reason for having the southeast branch at all is to connect into the national rail network south of the river, and thereby connect into the Thames Gateway. We do get significant movements from the North Kent area on to Crossrail at Abbey Wood.

  8129. There is a public participation in this as well as government support. It gets the whole ethos of government policy; it is all about sustainable communities and a sustainable railway. It just seems that going that kind of distance it is only traversing trains out of the area—through, but never stopping.
  (Mr Anderson) The principle reason for that link is the connection into the railway south of the river.

  8130. Not the people.
  (Mr Anderson) Yes, because clearly from Abbey Wood onwards you would connect with that and we have already connected north of the river with the docklands area.

  8131. It is a crossrail, across London railway, and it seems to be going through an area which is densely populated which is probably the most deprived in the city and yet you are not stopping, not even to wave—just going straight through.
  (Mr Anderson) All I can say is that it is very deep below ground and that is what has driven the high cost and I think that is what has led to the decision.

  8132. Mr Jones: Sir, I hope that this is the proper thing to do and not in any way wrong, but figures for the distances that have just been asked about were supplied a little while ago in a note from the Petitioner to the Promoter and I do not think they are disputed. They were Custom House to Abbey Wood, 7.55 kilometres, in round terms four and a half miles; Custom House to Woolwich was 4,150 metres; and Woolwich to Abbey Wood was 3,400 metres.

  Re-examined by Mr Elvin

  8133. Mr Elvin: Mr Anderson, can I come back to the questions that the Chairman and Mr Binley were asking about consideration of regeneration benefits. I would like to take the Committee through the process of what was assessed and whether regeneration issues were taken into account before the business case and the benchmark schemes were prepared. Can you explain what the latter approach is and what it involves and how we got to the case that was put to Montague?
  (Mr Anderson) Yes. I think we have already heard evidence on the five categories, which include economy, integration, accessibility and so on, and the regeneration aspects come up under integration and that is where we get the integration with other government policies such as those of regeneration. We can assess the effect of regeneration using the method I outlined earlier, that we actually work out the changes in accessibility across London, but particularly in relation to designated regeneration areas, and from that we can develop estimates of employment growth, and indeed these were cited in our statement. So that effect overall would have formed part of the vast assessment that was put to Montague.

  8134. Let me put the matter into plain English. The Committee clearly what to know from you to what extent the regeneration benefits of the different areas that are being targeted by Crossrail were taken into account, and in plain terms were they looked at and were they appraised?
  (Mr Anderson) Yes, they were.

  8135. Can we look at the Montague Report because it refers to some of these items? It is in the Promoter's bundle, exhibit 57.[19] This is from the Montague Business Report. We have the section headed "Wider benefits" and we see at 160: "Wider benefits are identified in three main areas. One is support for London's position as the pre-eminent FBS Centre," the City of London, the Isle of Dogs and elsewhere. "Support for the planning and transport policies for government, the GLA," et cetera. And thirdly, "Regeneration effects, particularly the Thames Gateway." The Committee can see, for example at 163, employment growth issues; 164 and 165 issues as to how you work those out. We see at 165 in particular, "CLRL believes that Crossrail has the potential to contribute significantly to the government's wider regeneration objectives, particularly Thames Gateway where a range of initiatives is planned in relation to housing, education and to health." Can I just understand this—and perhaps you can explain this to the Committee—that although a station at Woolwich is not proposed is it expected that benefits to the town's gateway area will be delivered by Crossrail, looking at the area generally?

  (Mr Anderson) Clearly, yes, a large proportion of the jobs indicated there would be related to the Thames Gateway. Indeed, I think strategically one of the reasons for actually taking the railway south of the river is to connect into the Thames Gateway.

  8136. Can I ask you about the reasons for taking it south of the river? In terms of the connections into the wider rail network that you mentioned earlier, what are the benefits in terms of the connection to the main line and the North Kent line?
  (Mr Anderson) It allows us to provide a high quality interchange with services from the Thames Gateway area.

  8137. But what does that do in real terms for those actually using the North Kent line?
  (Mr Anderson) It means that they can get off the train at Abbey Wood and walk across the platform and then get a—

  8138. Yes, but what that does that do for the quality of the service that is available?
  (Mr Anderson) It is much better, particularly if they are travelling into the Docklands area and the City area.

  8139. In terms of the benefits, therefore, coming south for connection, is that a benefit that is targeted at Abbey Wood, or is it a benefit that is targeted at North Kent?
  (Mr Anderson) It is targeted at a much wider area.


19   Crossrail Ref: P77, Crossrail Review, Wider Benefits, Paras 163-165 (GRCHLB-3604-057). Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2007
Prepared 14 November 2007