Examination of Witnesses (Questions 8700
- 8719)
8700. Chairman: What I need from you
is are you specifically and directly affected by the Bill? What
do you want us to do? We cannot replace one with the other.
8701. Mr Pearce: First of all, what I
want you to do is to be fair. I would like to invite the Select
Committee to attend the afternoon session of the colloquium of
experts for Mono Metro in Cardiff on 2 June so that you can ask
the experts for Mono Metro directly and you can take then a balanced
view on whether Crossrail is an illegal Bill and whether it should
be halted through Parliament or whether you should take a second
look and look at an alternative project that has been discriminated
against right from the start.
8702. Chairman: Can I say, Mr Pearce,
the Bill, as it stands, cannot be seen from this Committee as
illegal. It has been presented with a Bill by Parliament itself
and told to see the Bill through. We cannot judge in respect of
that. We have no remit. It is outside of any responsibility that
we have. As for attendance at a panel of experts meeting on 2
June, I think it is a little bit too late or near to the event
for us to attend but what I am prepared to do is if you are prepared
to send us the views of those experts then we will take that into
consideration in the petition in the course of the Bill.
8703. Mr Pearce: Yes. I was going to
come to that actually because we are in the process of producing
our technical and commercial feasibility study for the project
that will go together with the commercial feasibility for the
line between Hyde Park and the Olympic Stadium that we are proposing
to fund so that the Government would not have to fork out any
money for this project. We would build it, fund it and lease it
back to the London regional government. Yes, thank you very much,
we will be submitting that document to you. Can I ask you if you
will further have that document independently assessed as Crossrail
was independently assessed by Sir Adrian Montague?
8704. Chairman: What we will do is we
will receive any evidence and documentation which comes through
and we will view it in the light of the responsibilities we have
been given in relation to the Crossrail Bill. That is all we are
entitled to do. If it comes out we will look at it, whether it
has any relevance to the Bill and our responsibility is a matter
which we will have to use our own judgment on.
8705. Mr Pearce: Will you go back to
Parliament and will you inform Parliament of the legal situation
that now exists, that Crossrail cannot substantiate its choice
of technology because it is unable to disclose due process documents
that are absolutely vital? We have been asking for this for a
very long time, I am sorry it has come to this.
8706. Chairman: I am very grateful for
the opportunity to clear this matter up. Sir, you are in Parliament,
you are addressing Parliament.
8707. Mr Pearce: Yes.
8708. Chairman: This is Parliament.
8709. Mr Pearce: Yes but—
8710. Chairman: We, as I have said, will
take any evidence, any submissions that any petitioner puts forward
in due process and we will judge them in the light of the responsibility
we have in relation to this Bill. I can guarantee that. Whether
it comes up trumps for you or not is another matter entirely but
we will read everything and judge everything in due course.
8711. Mr Pearce: Thank you very much.
8712. Chairman: Mr Elvin, would you like
to add anything?
8713. Mr Elvin: Sir, no, I have already
made my submissions about the principle of the Bill. Can I just
make this absolutely clear: there is no breach of due process
caused by the Bill. This is a Bill which has been duly committed
to this Committee following the Standing Orders of the House.
Of course, Parliament is the master of its own process, subject
to any overriding principles of European law. The European law
principles of environmental assessment have been followed and
you have heard our position on that in opening. The only requirement
with regard to alternatives in environmental assessment is to
give an account of those alternatives which have been studied.
There is no general requirement to consider all alternatives advanced.
Those alternatives have been assessed and they are contained within
the alternative chapter of the Environmental Impact Assessment.
So far, therefore, as due process is concerned, (a) Parliament
has followed its own Standing Orders and committed this matter
to Committee and (b) the Environmental Assessment has complied
with the due requirements of European law. Therefore, there is
no legal issue involved in this matter.
8714. Chairman: Thank you, Mr Pearce.
We will now move on to the case of James Middleton. Mr Taylor?
The Petition of James Middleton.
The Petitioner appeared in Person.
8715. Mr Taylor: Mr Middleton is a resident
of Olney in Buckinghamshire which is in the Milton Keynes South
Midlands development area. In essence his petition raises concerns
regarding the nature of the rail network to be provided by Crossrail.
He contends that the project should be a wider strategic scheme
covering the South East and East of England. He also raises concerns
that it should not be a stopping metro operation but a regional
express. Again, just as Mr Elvin mentioned in relation to the
previous petition, we would raise issues concerning whether or
not the petition actually goes beyond the scope of the principle
of the Bill in proposing an entirely different project from that
which is before the Committee. That sets the context for what
Mr Middleton has to say.
8716. Chairman: The democratic process
is a peculiar thing, Mr Taylor, I think we will proceed. Mr Middleton?
8717. Mr Middleton: Thank you, Sir. I
would just like to get it straight, I have emailed what I am going
to say to Sian Jones, Mr Walker and Kate Pasquale from the Promoter.
As far as I know everyone has got a copy.
8718. My name is James Middleton. I live in
5 Crab Tree Close, Olney, Buckinghamshire. I am retired but I
have many years of experience in transport planning. I have prepared
my own drawings. I did do them on the dining room table but I
think you have versions of them. Olney is between Northampton,
Milton Keynes and Bedford.[108]
It is at the very centre of the Government's huge Milton Keynes
South Midlands development area.
8719. I am a strong supporter of Crossrail in
principle but it should be a regional scheme covering the South
East and East of England as well as London, not the slow London-only
operation put forward by the Promoter. A regional scheme would
serve a wide area, including my own stations of Milton Keynes
and Northampton. I am very surprised the Promoter has not followed
the successful Thameslink and Thameslink 2000 strategy.
108 Committee Ref: A100, Proposed Route Plan of Alternative
Regional Crossrail (SCN20060516-008). Back
| 
