Examination of Witnesses (Questions 700
- 719)
700. At the same time the level of deprivation
in Newham, and we will look at the evidence later on, is the fourth
highest within London. Are you aware of that?
(Dr Maynard) No, I was not aware of the
ranking, but I will take your word for that too.
701. If we cross back to the question of cumulative
effect of high deprivation and restricted mobility, in those broad
circumstances is it fair that it is an inequitable situation that
one finds in respect of the provision of accessibility at those
stations within Newham borough?
(Dr Maynard) Not necessarily. You are
taking the chunk out of the system again. Newham is not a walled
city; and it is not that people have to have the password in order
to exit Newham and get to somewhere else. Actually they may want
to travel in and out of Newham borough anyway. Yes, there may
be the highest number or even proportion, depending on how you
define proportion, of inaccessible stations, but that does not
necessarily mean that Newham is doing worse than anywhere else;
that is a flawed leap.
702. Can I understand, please, in terms of the
application of the criteria themselves I should be asking those
questions of Mr Berryman. Is that right?
(Dr Maynard) I think you might want to
ask those questions of Mr Berryman.
703. Perhaps I ought to be clear, I am talking
about the criteria that were applied by Crossrail in para 2.3
in its E5 Information Paper. Those are questions to Mr Berryman,
is that right?
(Dr Maynard) 2.3 and 2.5 I would suggest
because, as I have said, they would go together.
704. In that case, can I just deal please with
one other matter that you raised in your presentation, which is
the ability to obtain the upgrading of the currently inaccessible,
and indeed proposed inaccessible, stations through other means:
namely, either by the Access for All financial provision or by
private means, for example Network Rail?
(Dr Maynard) Could you just repeat that
again?
705. I want to deal with you, please, in respect
of your comments in your presentation to the effect that inaccessible
stations are capable of becoming accessible either through the
Access for All policy, or through private means, for example,
by Network Rail?
(Dr Maynard) Leaving aside that Network
Rail would not consider it was capable of finding private means
to upgrade stations, I do not think I said that.
706. Forgive me, did I misunderstand you?
(Dr Maynard) I think you may have done.
It is indeed the case that Access for All may one day, one day,
come to Maryland and Manor Park; but you can be well assured that
they are highly unlikely to get there in their current £365
million, or indeed possibly the next £365 million.
707. You anticipated my question. To be clear,
you are not suggesting that the currently inaccessible stations
are going to be made accessible by some other means. Is that right?
(Dr Maynard) Not to the best of my knowledge
and belief, no.
708. So in that sense upgrading Manor Park or
Maryland is an opportunity to be taken now or it will not happen.
Is that right
(Dr Maynard) Saying "it will not
happen" is making assumptions that I would choose not to
make. I would have said it is unlikely because of the nature of
Maryland and Manor Park, and all the reasons why Crossrail has
decided not to go ahead with making them accessible. What you
seem to be suggesting is that Crossrail should decide to make
them accessible because nobody else is going to and we should
have pity on them, or something. We should decide to take the
charitable approach and make them accessible.
709. Have I understood it correctly? Your position
is that it is unlikely that there will be other means by which
these stations will be upgraded in the future?
(Dr Maynard) I do not know whether they
will be upgraded or not in the future; but, given the nature of
the stations, they are going to miss other people's criteria too.
710. I see. In terms of those criteria, do you
know what those are in respect of the Access for All system?
(Dr Maynard) They are similar to the Crossrail
ones.
711. In terms of the Access for All financial
contribution, can we be clear that it is some £320 million
over ten years. Is that right?
(Dr Maynard) I thought it was £365
million. In fact originally it was £370 million; we appear
to have lost £5 million along the way.
712. That has led to a decision to upgrade some
200 stations, yes?
(Dr Maynard) 220 I think, yes.
713. That is in the context of some 2,500 stations
within the rail network?
(Dr Maynard) Yes, that is correct.
714. In terms of understanding the likelihood
of getting, at least in the foreseeable future, monies via the
Access for All system, it is not likely, is it?
(Dr Maynard) No, it is not particularly
likely.
715. Finally, you were asked a question in the
Committee stage in the Commons. Can you turn to the second of
the Special Report documents, and the last page. The document
should be headed "Volume IV: Oral evidence". Turn to
the last page, the righthand column number 13107. At 13109 is
Mr Binley, who was the Chairman of the Commons Committee, is that
right?[31]
(Dr Maynard) Yes.
716. He says: "Can I ask a question of
Mr Maynard ... "—and that must be a typographical error.
That is you, is it not?
(Dr Maynard) It is me, yes.
717. " ... because I guess you have a special
interest in this. Can you put your hand on your heart and say,
`Yes, I think they have done enough'?" Your answer to that
was this: "As a disabled person, I would like everywhere
to be accessible yesterday, and 2016 certainly qualifies as yesterday
for London. I work in the rail industry and the transport industry
in general, and there is a limited amount of resource; it is public
resource. If it gets spent in one place it does not get spent
in another. To an extent, you have to spread it about it a bit
and that involves making some pretty tough decisions. It involves
making decisions that result in some people not getting access.
If I lived in Hanwell, I would not be using that Hanwell station,
that is pretty obvious, and I might well feel a bit annoyed about
it. If I could get on a bus and go to West Ealing or Ealing Broadway,
then I might find those more convenient anyway. I do not know
much about Hanwell Station. If it is not staffed there are many
reasons why somewhere like Ealing Broadway might not be a better
place to go". What you did not there say was, "Yes,
I think they have done enough", did you, Dr Maynard?
(Dr Maynard) No, I did not.
718. Is that because you, hand on heart, do
not think they have done enough?
(Dr Maynard) Hand on heart, I do not think anybody has done
enough. I do not think anybody has done enough to make the world
accessible to disabled people until the world is accessible
to disabled people; but I would reiterate what I said there which
is that, in order to spread around that public resource, you need
to make some pretty tough decisions, and this is one of the pretty
tough decisions that you have to make. It is about balancing need.
I would say exactly the same about this as I would about Hanwell,
and I would do that hand on heart.
719. Of course, you were not involved in that
decision itself, in respect of these stations, were you?
(Dr Maynard) No, I was not.
31 House of Commons Select Committee on the Crossrail
Bill, First Special Report Session 2006-07, Crossrail Bill,
HC 235-IV, paras 13107 to 13109 (SCN-20080226-010) Back
| 
