Examination of Witnesses (Questions 8740
- 8759)
8740. The Promoter says Crossrail will link
Thames Gateway, Docklands, the City, Stratford, the West End and
Heathrow. It will also serve the western and eastern suburbs,
both of which are expected to see major traffic growth over the
next 10 years.
8741. A Regional Crossrail will do all this,
plus better links to Thames Gateway, serve the huge Milton Keynes
South Midlands area at Aylesbury, Milton Keynes and Northampton,
serve Cambridge, Stansted, M11 and the Lea Valley. Regional Crossrail
is infinitely better in serving the Government's wider development
aspirations. The regions surrounding London are where rail is
really growing, for example there is a 50 per cent growth in rail
use in the East of England between 1995 and 2002, a huge growth.
8742. In the response the Promoter did reject
the Aylesbury line which would form part of any regional Crossrail.
Their conclusions were that it performed strongly on transport,
economic efficiency and reliability. In other words, it attracted
a lot of passengers and gave a significant positive economic benefit
and would be reliable. It was not selected because of adverse
contractual impacts on the Chiltern Line franchise and the Metronet
PPP. It seems a strange logic really that the rail network has
to be fossilised for years and sound projects rejected to suit
contracts that should be there to improve the railway. Crossrail
would be improved in every way if some of the trains terminating
at Paddington went to Aylesbury.
8743. The Promoter says that to change now would
mean major delays. These can be limited as the most difficult
part of the scheme is unchanged and there has already been a lot
of work done looking at alternatives. I do not see regional Crossrail
as an extension of the scheme but rather a more effective joining
of Crossrail into the national rail network. In many ways it would
simplify the project with trains terminating and being stabled
where they currently are, rather than having to provide extensive
new facilities. If billions of pounds are going to be spent, it
is vital to get the scheme right.
8744. Coming to my conclusions. Crossrail is
a once in a generation opportunity that must not be wasted. There
must be something wrong if Network Rail, the custodian and operator
of the national rail network, is an objector rather than an enthusiastic
promoter of Crossrail. The train operators, British Airports Authority,
the South East and East of England Regional Assemblies all want
Crossrail but they do not want the Promoter's scheme.
8745. Regional Crossrail will be more attractive
to investors. Given the investment going into London prior to
the Olympics, a further London-only scheme straight afterwards
would not be well received. A Regional Crossrail would have much
greater support.
8746. I hope the Committee will look carefully
at the Regional option for Crossrail. At little extra cost, and
by using existing lines, many more passengers travelling far more
miles will use Crossrail and contribute to the costs. The maximum
possible relief will be afforded to the London Rail network and
central termini and the London Underground. The project would
give the greatest possible support to the Government's development
plans, the development of the regions and the aspirations to reduce
greenhouse gases. It would truly cross the capital and connect
the UK.
8747. My table 2, page 7, shows how the train
indicator boards would be if you turn up at Farringdon in 2015.[112]
The top board is what you would see for 15 minutes of Thameslink
services. It looks excellent. Turn up, a range of destinations
to the north and south. Crossrail looks pathetic when compared
with Regional Crossrail. If you are going to spend billions of
pounds you should not turn up and say four of the six trains go
to Paddington, it is hopeless.
8748. I have gone to the trouble of petitioning
the Committee myself as to get Crossrail to Milton Keynes and
Northampton means a bit of a change of strategy. At my age I may
never see the scheme finished but it is vital to ensure that the
right scheme goes forward. The more I looked into the issue the
more convinced I became that Regional Crossrail was the right
project and best met the Government's wider objectives.
8749. I would like to thank the Committee for
listening to my petition and also Sian Jones and her colleagues
for helping me through the petition process. Thank you.
8750. Chairman: Mr Taylor?
8751. Mr Taylor: Thank you, Sir. I was
not proposing to ask questions or indeed call a witness but just
to make submissions. To begin with, it is plain that Mr Middleton
is asking for a different scheme to come forward and the present
scheme to be dropped. The Promoter would respectfully suggest
that goes against the principle of the Bill established by Second
Reading, although obviously that is a matter for the Committee
to consider. So far as the points made regarding the decision
to go with a regional metro type network as opposed to a regional
express network, that matter was considered in the year 2000 when
the then shadow strategic rail authority carried out the London
East-West study, LEWS I think we all know it as by now.[113]
It was that study which led to the current planning and development
work for Crossrail. The study investigated which of those two
service types would be most suited for operating on Crossrail
and concluded that the regional metro type service pattern should
be favoured over the regional express pattern for a range of reasons,
including the much poorer service reliability which would be achieved
with the regional express service pattern due to the high level
of interrun with other rail services. The Committee will be aware
that more information on that decision is set out in chapter six
of the Crossrail Environmental Statement published in February
last year.
8752. In addition the Promoters produced an
information paper, A1, the development of the Crossrail route
which again explains the reasoning which led to the selection
of the current route.[114]
In brief and rather brutal summary the wider ranging alternatives
that were considered did not appear rightly to generate sufficient
traffic and/or have technical problems which would be difficult
and extensive to overcome leading to a poor cost benefit ratio.
8753. By limiting the number of branches served
and operating wherever possible on segregated tracks the Promoter
expects to provide an efficient and reliable service. Spreading
the service over numerous routes would increase the risk of importing
delays from other lines on to the busy central section of Crossrail
with consequent disruption to Crossrail's own services. By creating
a large number of opportunities for connection and interchange
with other services and other modes of transport Crossrail will
provide improved transport over a wide area of the South East.
8754. Crossrail will, of course, link with the
regeneration areas to the east of London and it will link to the
important commuter stations to the west and, of course, to Heathrow
Airport to the west. In essence it serves London's western and
eastern suburbs, both of which are expected to see major traffic
growth over the next 10 years.
8755. After a long period of design studies
and consultation the Promoter has concluded that the present Crossrail
scheme is the best way of giving significant benefits to the largest
possible number of people at a proportionate cost and by a means
which is technically feasible.
8756. Unless there is anything else I can help
the Committee with, those are my submissions.
8757. Chairman: Mr Middleton, do you
want the last word, albeit very brief?
8758. Mr Middleton: Yes. I dealt with
those points in my submission. Basically if they can do it for
Thameslink why not do it for Crossrail? Really I feel that there
is far too much London influence in this. We have a Mayor of London
who has a very strong transport authority whereas the regions
to the South East and East of England are fairly vague, they have
nothing like the clout. The fact that the shadow strategic rail
authority decided this was the best scheme, even having accepted
it has a higher income, does not mean anything. Strategic rail
authorities have come and gone since then, they have been abandoned
for whatever reason.
8759. I realise I missed out one of my paragraphs.
If I could just say our traveller now from Southend to Reading
on Regional Crossrail would make the journey in one go or we would
have a simple get off the train at Bond Street, get on the next
one and go off to Reading. For people like me in Milton Keynes,
Northampton and Aylesbury, instead of just being dumped at Euston
or Marylebone, we would be able to get direct to the West End,
pop off at Paddington go to Heathrow, the City, Canary Wharf,
Eurostar. I would hope and perhaps go so far as to say if I was
on the Committee I would want to be convinced that if we are going
to spend billions of pounds the strategy is right.
112 Committee Ref: A100, Farringdon 2015-Typical train
indicator boards for 15 minutes in peak hours (LINEWD-2705-007). Back
113
London East-West Study, Strategic Rail Authority, November 2000,
www.crossrail.co.uk Back
114
Crossrail Information Paper A1-Development of the Crossrail Route
http://billdocuments.crossrail.co.uk Back
| 
