Examination of Witnesses (Questions 15580
- 15599)
15580. One final question on a subject that
the Committee know an awful lot about by now. Slide 24, exhibit
25, it is something I feel impelled to pick you up on, the fourth
bullet point "Access options give exclusive rights to Crossrail".[28]
I must say that came as a massive surprise to us. Are you saying
that Crossrail is seeking exclusive rights on the Great Eastern
through the access option? That is certainly not our understanding
of what we are doing.
(Mr Harston) Exclusive rights
to the access options you were seeking.
15581. Exactly in the same way that any train
operator who seeks an access option gets exclusive rights to their
own access option?
(Mr Harston) I cannot argue
with that, but the points I have seen made in the transcripts
is that standing on its own, that is fine, but with the powers
currently sought under the Bill there is no certainty that the
access option will only relate to those tracks.
15582. The point in that bullet point is not
really about the access option, it is about the railway clauses
in the Bill, is that fair?
(Mr Harston) It has the
same effect as powers.
15583. Ms Lieven: Thank you very much.
15584. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Mr Straker,
anything else?
Re-examined by Mr Straker
15585. Mr Straker: Can I ask this, you
were asked about questions that touched on Doncaster and the fact
that trains go through Doncaster. Help the Committee, please,
in this way, as far as trains from the Haven ports going anywhere
throughout the United Kingdom is concerned, do they travel through
London?
(Mr Harston) I think it
is a very important point, Mr Straker, and the reason that we
are undertaking the works or are required to undertake the works
between Felixstowe and Peterborough is the timetabling work and
the capacity work, which we undertook with the strategic rail
authority and the Network Rail Strategic Access Planning team
verified, validated and the agreed the number of paths that are
available to us, is because ordinarily that traffic would do the
same as road traffic, it would go via the north London lines and
up the west coast mainline or the east coast mainline to be distributed
nationally. Having identified the number of paths that are available
on those routes, it was identified that there would be a shortfall
and that shortfall could be met by carrying out the works across
country so the east coast mainline could be joined at Peterborough
and effectively create a bypass for the north London line, but
that was on the basis of the capacity being made available to
us, from which Crossrail undoubtedly takes away a significant
part of that capacity.
15586. Mr Straker: With Crossrail taking
away that capacity, what difference is there between the situation
which confronted you at Harwich and Felixstowe in terms of the
trains on the line crossing through London and Crossrail deflecting
trains from London?
(Mr Harston) I do not think
there is any difference.
15587. Mr Straker: Thank you very much,
sir. That is all I want to ask by way of re-examination.
15588. Mr Liddell-Grainger: Mr Harston,
please stand down.
The witness withdrew
15589. Mr Liddell-Grainger: I think you
have a second witness?
15590. Mr Straker: Yes, that is correct,
sir. The second witness, sir, I think has already at least started
in another context to give evidence to your Committee. Mr Mike
Garratt.
Mr Mike Garratt, Sworn
Examined by Mr Straker
15591. Mr Liddell-Grainger: If I may
make a point to Mr Straker and Ms Lieven, I think Doncaster and
Nuneaton can stay off the menu for the rest of the afternoon.
I think the point has been well made in three days. We accept
the points. There is nothing we can do. The point is understood.
15592. Mr Straker: I am very grateful,
sir, for that indication. The essential point we very much want
the Committee to have in mind is that the consequences of putting
something into a railway network are felt beyond the need of the
present.
15593. Mr Liddell-Grainger: The Committee
has already accepted that. Thank you very much.
15594. Mr Straker: Can I then simply
reintroduce Mr Garratt to the Committee. Mr Mike Garratt, you
are the managing director of MSD Transmodel and you, likewise,
have produced some slides and, once again, I suspect, sir, you
will have the slides as soon as may be. You record your experience.
We can pass on to slide two the questions which you were asked
and we can deal with that, I suspect, at pace because you were
asked questions to help, we trust, the Committee in its consideration
of this matter. Can we then look at slide three, please, or number
three.[29]
You here identify, do you, what happens when one decides whether
or not to grant permission or planning permission?
(Mr Garratt) That is so.
15595. A route and looking ahead rather than
the situation as it is currently. If we go to slide four, please.[30]
What will things be like when the development is operating? Has
Crossrail asked that question?
(Mr Garratt) In this context
it appears not, no.
15596. Slide five and I take this quickly, sir,
with your leave, you record the growth in port container traffic
with the need to accommodate that and figure one continuing gives
the container volumes once again in TEU 20-foot equivalent units
up to 2020.[31][32]
You have done in a forecast of train movements, figure two, for
Felixstowe.[33]
Bathside Bay, sir, is also known as "Harwich International
Container Port".
15597. Let us look at figure three, please.[34]
I want your help, Mr Garratt, about this one. If we look at all
rail freight in 2005, we have got something in the order of 20
million tons?
(Mr Garratt) That is correct.
What this slide is attempting to show is there are currently about
20 million tons of rail freight in, at and through London of which
about half, 10 million, pass through. Of those 10 million tons
passing through, the majority, 5.7 million tons, is contained
traffic and, therefore, in the long run and is available to bypass
if you like. They do not necessarily have to be there.
15598. Ten million tons passing through London
with the capacity, therefore, to be affected by other trains within
London?
(Mr Garratt) That is correct.
15599. Then we have the Haven port rail traffic,
please, which records where that goes and one can take this, I
suspect, to some degree of speed as well.[35]
That records where it comes from and what is presently the position.
We get to slide seven, please, where you have recorded certain
rail volumes going through Forest Gate? [36]
(Mr Garratt) Yes, if I can make
a small correction here. The first bullet should read "27
paths in each direction on the Great Eastern through Shenfield
to accommodate up to 24 trains in each direction".
28 Committee Ref: A173, Rail Regulation and Access
Option (LINEWD-11705-025). Back
29
Committee Ref: A173, Rail Capacity and Planning (LINEWD-11705A-004). Back
30
Committee Ref: A173, Rail Capacity and Planning (LINEWD-11705A-005). Back
31
Committee Ref: A173, National Port Container Demand (LINEWD-11705A-006). Back
32
Committee Ref: A173, Forecast Container Volumes GB Ports (excluding
3rd country transhipments) (LINEWD-11705A-007). Back
33
Committee Ref: A173, Forecast Container Train Movements/day (LINEWD-11705A-008). Back
34
Committee Ref: A173, London Rail Freight Traffic: million tonnes
2005 (LINEWD-11705A-009). Back
35
Committee Ref: A173, Haven Port Rail Traffic (LINEWD-11705A-010). Back
36
Committee Ref: A173, Base Line Rail Volumes-Forest Gate (LINEWD-11705A-011). Back
| 
