Examination of Witnesses (Questions 720
- 739)
720. We can take it then that from your answer
in respect of nobody doing enough that Crossrail have not done
enough in this regard?
(Dr Maynard) Neither has the House of
Lords; neither has the Department for Transport; neither has the
Department for Health; and neither have I actually in relation
to my own company done enough.
721. MR REED: I am grateful for your
indulgence, my Lord.
722. CHAIRMAN: Ms Lieven?
723. MS LIEVEN: My Lord, the only issue
I wanted to come back on was that of Romford and the comparison
with Romford that was made; but I think I will do that with Mr
Berryman who is much more familiar with the detail of what is
being proposed at Romford and the differences between Romford
and Manor Park. I have not got any re-examination of Dr Maynard.
Examined by THE
COMMITTEE
724. LORD SNAPE: The first question from
Mr Reed, Dr Maynard, referred to the document "Railways for
All", the accessibility strategy for Britain's railways.
Could you go back to that for a moment, please?[32]
He referred you to the third paragraph of the foreword, the second
sentence which begins, "With around ten million disabled
people". Do you recognise that figure of ten million?
(Dr Maynard) I am always fascinated by figures
in relation to disabled people. If you listen to the RNID, the
Royal National Institute for Deaf People, there are eight and
a half million severely deaf people in the UK; there are two million
people with visual impairments; there are four million people
with learning difficulties; and there are one million wheelchair
users. If you take into account that some people have multiple
impairments and you add them all up you are still in the range.
So ten million, 20 million, you can read 20 million in some places.
725. I was rather looking towards the other
end of the spectrum. Would that ten million disabled people mentioned
in that foreword include the people with restricted mobility to
whom you referred in your evidence earlier today?
(Dr Maynard) It is more the other way round, that people
with restricted mobility would include that ten million. What
you need to consider in relation to the ten million is that of
those ten million there are many people with visual impairments,
hearing impairments or learning difficulties none of whom need
step-free access in this particular context. If you are looking
at the need for step-free access it is much more about the million
wheelchair users or the 800,000, depending on whose counting you
take any notice of. I believe that one figure is around four million
for people who have some kind of walking difficulty, and whether
or not they have a walking difficulty that prevents them going
the 50 metres that you get a blue badge after, I do not know.
726. People in wheelchairs, you mentioned a
figure there, could you just repeat it?
(Dr Maynard) It is between 800,000 and a million. Some of
those are not permanent wheelchair users. There are no good figures
for this kind of thing; it depends how you count and everybody
counts differently.
727. Could you give the Committee an estimate?
Country-wide how many people, in your opinion, would find enormous
difficulty, in fact difficulty which would put them off travelling
if they had to use stations like the ones we are talking about,
Maryland and Manor Park?
(Dr Maynard) I have two answers to that question. The first
is: no, I am sorry, I cannot possibly give you an estimate.
728. And the second! Maybe you will!
(Dr Maynard) It would be a fairy story. I have no idea. The
second is: if you are saying "would have to use Maryland
and Manor Park", actually most of the people would not have
to use Maryland and Manor Park. If there is anyone who has
to it would be somebody who lived next door to one of them, and
for whom it made absolutely no sense to go anywhere else. Having
lived within probably about 100 metres of an inaccessible station,
what matters is that you know where you can go to access an accessible
station and that that remains accessible, and the way you get
there is fairly straightforward and, in some instances, that actually
it is a better station, as we were talking about Stratford earlier.
729. LORD SNAPE: Moving off that particular
subject, Mr Reed compared Havering Station to Manor Park. Did
you have anything to do with the planning of Havering Station
so far as Crossrail was concerned? I think he did ask you this
question and I think your answer was no, is that right?
730. MS LIEVEN: It is Romford, my Lord.
It is in the London Borough of Havering, but the station is Romford.
731. LORD SNAPE: I am sorry. Romford
Station in the Borough of Havering.
(Dr Maynard) I did not have anything to do with the detail,
but I was party to the discussions about Romford.
732. Do you happen to know the distance between
stations in the Romford area?
(Dr Maynard) No I cannot remember, to be honest. It was quite
a long time ago that we did this. This is one of the areas where
I think there is quite a significant difference between this and
what we are talking about.
733. MS LIEVEN: My Lord, can I just deal
with that point so that the Committee is factually clear on this.
Romford Station has always been proposed to be fully PRM accessible—always;
it has always been part of the scheme. The issue that arose before
the House of Commons was about whether there should be a secondary
step-free access to the south side of the station. Mr Berryman
gave extensive evidence about how, one, that was not necessary;
and, two, it would be extremely difficult, extremely difficult,
in engineering terms. In the end we reached agreement with Havering
to provide a differently orientated station, so we met Havering's
concern in respect of that access issue from the south side of
the station, but it was never, in truth, about PRM accessibility
because the station was always proposed to be fully accessible.
The real concern that Havering had was about interchange between
the bus stops, which were to the south of the station, and getting
into the station, which involved going underneath the bridge.
That was the nature of the issue, but it was always a fully accessible
station.
734. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: When
you were answering Lord Snape's first question, and you said you
could not give an answer, was it because you did not know the
answer but the answer may be available from the Department for
Transport or from other quarters?
(Dr Maynard) I do not think there is an answer to that. The
question was about if you were required to use Maryland or Manor
Park, but the problem is then what does that mean? Why might you
absolutely have to use Maryland, for example, when Stratford is
600 metres away? That is the problem. It is that judgment as to
whether you have to use it or not.
735. I think the first question was about the
anticipated growth in numbers.
(Dr Maynard) Remind me of your first question!
736. LORD SNAPE: That was yours as well.
737. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: When
we say that people at present who are visually impaired would
not necessarily require to use no-step, what I am trying to establish
is, with the growth of older people in the country and the growth
in the number of people with disabilities of one sort of another,
are there figures around which will indicate the likely growth,
say, in 2015, 2017 or 2019, and that those people who now would
not have a problem with a single step actually could, conceivably,
have a problem in ten years' time or 15 years' time?
(Dr Maynard) It may be possible to get those sorts of figures
from the Department for Transport; it may be possible to get them
from the Department of Health.
738. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: And
the Disability Commission?
739. CHAIRMAN: Ms Lieven, you were going
to see if you could do something about this.
The Petition of the London Borough of
Newham
32 Committee Ref: A1, Department for Transport, Railways
for All Strategy, March 2006, p3 (SCN-20080226-011) Back
| 
