Examination of Witnesses (Questions 21240
- 21259)
21240. The second issue that we have in terms
of the actual use of the project is that we converted the ship
into a documentary photography gallery and a learning space, and
over the last three years have increasing numbers of youngsters
coming there, experiencing the ship in different guises and learning
and supporting their learning in school. We are concerned about
the impact of any kind of relocation, given the links we have
built up with local schools and local businesses who support us.
21241. We have had some consultation with both
British Waterways and Crossrail in terms of looking at the possibilities,
and we are really here today to safeguard the future of the ship
and ensure that there is no damage done to the project and the
physical structure of the ship, and to try to put some plan in
place with the stakeholders during the construction period.
21242. Mr Kampfner: Sir, can I, with
your permission, distribute some photographs of our location?
21243. Chairman: For the record, A246.
21244. Mr Kampfner: Sir, the pictures
that you have been given today illustrate a little bit about the
project, but can I just give a little bit of background in addition
to what my wife has mentioned. We are a registered charity, we
are a non-profit organisation and we are, essentially, volunteer
led. My wife and I co-founded the project in 2002 and we were
hugely supported by Mr Fink, who is here today, from British Waterways.
British Waterways Board have been extremely helpful and valuable
supporters of the project, as are our other corporate mentors
in the area who help us with the school projects that we run on
board, including Credit Suisse, Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers.
We have volunteers from those organisations who help us mentoring
the school students who come on board.
21245. Essentially, the ship is the oldest complete
steam ship in the world and she is the last remaining steam coaster
of her type, and is an excellent example of British merchant shipping.
It is fitting that she should be in West India Dock, given that
she was built in Bow. I feel, to some extent, that her position
in West India Dock has been neglected for a while and that, thankfully,
since we have been able to develop this project, some of that
sense of history is starting to come back, and that is the core
of the project that we run with schools around issues of history
and identity and heritage. Those benefits are starting to be seen
through some of the local schools that we work with.
21246. We are also beginning to be supported
by some of the high-tech industries around us, some of whom I
have mentioned, and they are increasingly also joined by computer
companies, including Apple Computers, who have donated equipment
and training to us and school groups who come on board.
21247. Our major concern is the loss of these
last five years of hard work that the professional volunteers
and community volunteers have put into the project. Relocating
the ship is potentially disastrous for this project. If we were
to lose the visibility, the sense of historic place, the transport
links, the pedestrian safety which is key for the school groups,
and the visibility that is important for our corporate mentors
to be able to come on board and help us, we feel that the project
may well die. It is not by any means secure; funding is not at
all secure in place for the long term, and we exist on a process
of donations that we are building but which is, essentially, down
to our links with the corporate groups that we have built relationships
with over the past five years.
21248. If I can just briefly touch on some of
the possibilities from the suggestions which have been mentioned
today in terms of relocation, I would like to say, to begin with,
that the indications that we have been given are that West India
Quay is not yet, as far as I know, definitively to be drained
west of the DLR bridge. I would appreciate your advice or guidance
on this. We are unclear as to whether that is, actually, a definitive
statement or whether this is still available for negotiation.
Obviously, our primary objective would be to maintain our existence
in West India Dock as we are, on the north side of West India
Quay. If there is any way at all that we can maintain that presence
that would be, without doubt, our preference.
21249. To come on to Middle Dock, which is one
of the suggestions which has been made, Middle Dock, if we did
have to move, would be our second preference. As far as we understand,
there is not a navigable reason why we could not be there. We
are a little bit unsure why that has been suggested as a problem.
We understand that on a navigable basis we would be able to find
a space within Middle Dock.
21250. South Quay represents considerable problems
for us. I think if we were to find ourselves relocated to South
Quay we would discover that local schools would have difficulty
reaching us; we would have difficulties with the pedestrian access
and we would also find that some of the corporate mentors and
supporters would start to wane on the basis of that location.
We also have proximity to the Museum in Docklands, which we appreciate
and we feel is very valuable, and we believe that West India Dock
is, as has been indicated by some of our stakeholders, our natural
home. We would like to state quite categorically that if there
is any way at all to maintain our presence there we would like
that to be considered.
21251. We are, at the moment, in the process
of a significant fundraising bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund
to restore the integrity of the hull of the ship, which is an
1890 ribbed steel hull, which needs to be refitted at some point
in the near future. If there is a way in which we can be refitted
before any particular land-locking of West India Dock that may
be, also, a possibility that we would be interested in discussing,
but obviously it is the intention of all the stakeholders that
we remain visible and that we continue to be an icon, if you like,
for the history of the docks.
21252. We are the only publicly accessible historic
ship in East London. We are, as my wife mentioned, on the same
core collection list as the Cutty Sark. The only reason
we believe that Robin has not had the visibility and public
awareness as Cutty Sark until now is purely the fact that
she has lain derelict until 2002, and we hope to see her restored
to as much a jewel of East London as we think Cutty Sark
is in South London.
21253. She was brought back in 1974 from Spain
by the Maritime Trust as a shining example of her type, and that
project was led by HRH Duke of Edinburgh, who is also one of our
patrons. We feel that she has a fantastic future and we feel that
if that future is compromised by a location in which the awareness
dwindles, some of the motivation and the enthusiasm that we have
built over the last five years would be difficult to restore were
she to come back to West India Dock after that period of time.
We would like to maintain that visibility and we appreciate your
understanding.
21254. Chairman: Thank you.
21255. Mr Mould: I am going to ask Mr
Berryman to go briefly to the witness table and deal with the
question of relocation.
Mr Keith Berryman, recalled
Examined by Mr Mould
21256. Mr Mould: Mr Berryman, first of
all, I have explained to the Committee that the position is that
we feel that we have to relocate the SS Robin for the purposes
of constructing the Isle of Dogs station. Just in terms of the
permanent situation, is there any reason why the SS Robin
should not then return after construction has been completed to
its present berth?
(Mr Berryman) From our perspective, there is
absolutely no reason at all why that should not happen. I know
that British Waterways Board are very supportive of Robin,
so I would be quite surprised if they have any objection in principle.
Certainly from our point of view, no, there is no reason why not.
21257. Just remind us: what is the expected
duration of the works in North Dock?
(Mr Berryman) It would take about a minimum
of 3.5 years and a maximum of 5 years before the water was let
back into the dock.
21258. So that is the situation from a permanent
perspective. Let us turn to the construction phase.. What is the
situation? Mr Kampfner has asked for reassurance about the position
as to whether or not it would be possible for the SS Robin
to remain in situ during the course of the works. What is the
situation?
(Mr Berryman) I think there are two scenarios,
as you know, that we have been developing over the construction
of the station. One of them involves lowering the water in the
dock by about 5 metres.[10]
To put that into perspective, this room measures 6.7 metres high,
so the boat would be a long way down the quay wall if it were
to stay there. The other option involves the complete draining
of the dock in that particular area, albeit it will be a silt
store.[11]
The reality is, from the boat's perspective, leaving it in a place
where it could not be got out if it needed any attention or work
would be an extremely risky thing to do, and our argument would
be it is not actually possible for it to stay there. Quite apart
from our construction issues, there are also issues to do with
the boat itself.
21259. We were told that the boat is a historic
vessel and Mr Kampfner said something about its value in that
respect.
(Mr Berryman) Yes. As he said, and as most
of us have seen, it is quite an old vessel and extremely risky
if it needed any attention that it could not be got at.
10 Crossrail Ref: P155, Crossrail Isle of Dogs Station-Site
Plan (Scenario 1) (TOWHLB-325-04-016). Back
11
Crossrail Ref: P155, Crossrail Isle of Dogs Station-Site Plan
(Scenario 2) (TOWHLB-325-04-017). Back
|
