Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120
- 139)
120. One specific issue which has arisen and
is raised by a number of Petitions, particularly those from the
Spitalfields and the St James/Mayfair area, is the assessment
of alternatives, and again that will be dealt with in detail at
the relevant time. I would just draw your Lordships' attention
to the fact that this was the subject of detailed correspondence,
submissions and evidence before the House of Commons' Committee.
Our position is summarised in Information Paper B8, and we simply
note at this stage that the requirement of an Environmental Statement
under EU law is simply that it should give an outline of the main
options studied and an indication of the main reasons for the
choice, taking into account the environmental effects. This has
been done, we say, but no doubt your Lordships will be hearing
more on the subject.
121. I turn to the European Convention on Human
Rights.[40]
As your Lordships would expect, Lord Bassam has confirmed, on
behalf of the Government and indeed as required under section
19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998, that, in his view, the
provisions of the Crossrail Bill are compatible with the European
Convention, and this of course remains the Government's position.
122. In terms of the main substantive Convention
rights engaged, the Promoters are satisfied that the public benefits
of Crossrail are sufficient to outweigh the impact of Crossrail
on the Petitioners' private and proprietary rights, including
their homes. The Promoters consider that measures proposed by
the Bill are proportionate, when considered in the context of
the right to claim compensation for compulsory purchase and in
the context also of the many undertakings and assurances given
by the Promoter and amendments made in the case of individual
Petitioners as required by the Select Committee in the other place.
123. Finally, my Lords, the Promoters commend
to your Lordships' consideration the Bill which has already been
subject, as I have said, to extensive scrutiny during its progress
and which enjoys considerable support from a broad section of
the community, and I would simply end by drawing your Lordships'
attention to some of the recent public statements made in support
of Crossrail and your Lordships see on the screen before you statements
by the Prime Minister who said, on 1 October last year, "This
is a huge national project that is vital for the long-term prosperity
of the nation's capital and indeed the whole country", echoed
in their different ways by the Mayor of London last year and indeed
by the City of London.[41]
These are merely representative of the broad consensus and, whilst
it is true that there are those who raise criticisms of aspects
of the project, there is undoubtedly a broad sweep of consensus
in favour of Crossrail, and we commend the Bill to your Lordships'
Committee. My Lords, we have managed to conclude.
124. CHAIRMAN: Just before you finish,
Mr Elvin, could I ask you to elaborate a little bit on the railway
clauses point? I know it is a matter of speculation, but we are
due to deal with this matter immediately after the so-called Easter
recess.
125. MR ELVIN: Indeed, my Lord.
126. CHAIRMAN: I wonder how far the negotiations
and proceedings are likely to have reached at that stage. I do
not suppose that the amendments to the railway clauses are going
to be made by this Committee. I imagine they are going to be made
on the floor of the House at the next stage of the Bill.
General presentation by the Promoters
on noise and vibration
127. MR ELVIN: My Lord, yes.
128. CHAIRMAN: Nevertheless, such amendments
will be of great interest to some of the Petitioners on the railway
side and so will the access option which is currently under discussion
by the ORR.
129. MR ELVIN: Indeed.
130. CHAIRMAN: Can you give us any forecast
at all about whether these things are likely to come to conclusion?
131. MR ELVIN: My Lord, the best I can
do at the moment, as I have already indicated, is that my latest
information is that the Board considers the matter this afternoon
and we should be receiving very shortly a `minded-to' indication
of the broad thinking, and I understand that that means the broad
points which are considered to be acceptable to the ORR and the
broad points of concern to the ORR. That should lead to a final
decision on the access option and my understanding, and it has
just been confirmed by Mr Lancaster who sits behind me, that the
ORR is aware of the timetable which your Lordships' Committee
is working to and a final decision should be made before the matter
comes before the Committee.
132. CHAIRMAN: I think that would be
very, very important.
133. MR ELVIN: As your Lordships will
understand, we are doing our utmost to ensure that the ORR is
kept up to date with the Committee's timetable and that we get
a position clear as soon as possible. My Lord, it may well be
that the best I can do at this stage is simply to offer to update
your Lordships as we get further information, but the intention
and the plan is that we will know what the access option is in
a matter of detail as well as the broad principles before the
railway Petitioners come before this Committee.
134. CHAIRMAN: Good, thank you.
135. MR ELVIN: My Lord, there was one
procedural matter which I wondered if your Lordships would mind
if I raised following our opening submission, and that is simply
the question of documents which your Lordship touched upon in
his opening remarks. My Lord, I wondered whether the Committee
would be prepared to endorse the position with regard to documents
from Petitioners which they are proposing to rely upon before
the Committee, that the Committee asks that the Petitioners should
provide copies of those documents to the Promoters, that is to
ourselves, at least one working day, 24 hours, in advance of any
committee hearing to give us an opportunity (a) to consider them
and (b) to respond to them, if necessary. My Lord, by a working
day in advance, I mean to cover the position at the weekends,
so that, if a Petitioner is going to be heard on Monday afternoon,
we have received those documents by the preceding Friday morning
at the latest.
136. CHAIRMAN: I think my colleagues
would all endorse that and the further in advance, the better
because, apart from anything else, it would be a good idea if
we saw them before we started listening to the Petitioners.
137. MR ELVIN: Indeed, and I am grateful
to the Committee for that and clearly we will make sure, through
Mr Walker and through the Committee clerks' good offices, that
the Petitioners are told that the 24 hours is perhaps a working
minimum and, if the Petitioners can improve on that, they should.
I should of course say that we will follow the same timetable
ourselves as the Promoters.
138. CHAIRMAN: Yes, but you cannot produce
your response document necessarily until you have seen the documents
from the Petitioner.
139. MR ELVIN: That is true, but there
may be material that we are planning to produce in any event to
explain our position on a Petition and we will make sure that
that is disclosed according to that timetable. Clearly, if we
have to produce something new to respond to material that we have
not seen, that will obviously take a little longer, but we will
produce the material we know we are likely to have to rely upon
according to the same timetable that I have just indicated. I
hope that is acceptable to the Committee.
40 Crossrail Ref: P1, European Convention on Human
Rights (LINEWD-OPN1-037) Back
41
Crossrail Ref: P1, Support for Crossrail (LINEWD-OPN1-038) Back
| 
