Examination of Witnesses (Questions 760
- 779)
760. CHAIRMAN: You are not proposing
to deal with that? I think we might be quite interested to know
at some time what has happened.
761. MR REED: Yes, my Lord.
762. CHAIRMAN: Anyway, we do not need
to bother about that.
763. MR REED: Thank you very much, my
Lord. My Lord, it has come up on to the screen as slide 26.[33]
The position is that we are seeking to request that the Committee
recommend that the Promoter should require the nominated undertaker
to carry out works to Manor Park and Maryland Stations to bring
them to a standard of accessibility for the mobility impaired
that is equivalent to the standards proposed for the majority
of the other above-ground, existing stations which are to be serviced
by Crossrail Effectively, a request that there be a recommendation
for lift provision for step-free access at those stations.
764. My Lord, the position in relation to the
provision of lifts at both of those stations is that, as Newham
understand the position, the lift provision is capable of being
made within the limits of deviation of the works that are set
out as part of the Bill, except for certain temporary worksites.
My Lord, for the reasons that Mr West will elucidate, the prospect
is there would be no difficulty in being able to achieve that.
In short, there is the ability to provide the new lifts to provide
step-free access at both Maryland and Manor Park.
765. Before I deal with some of the reasons
as to why that should be made as a recommendation and why we ask
that there be that recommendation, can I deal with the extent
to which Newham have raised the issue of accessibility at both
those stations previously?
766. CHAIRMAN: You did not do it in the
Commons, did you?
767. MR REED: What we did was, in our
Petition, require, firstly, that there be stopping at Maryland
and, also, generally, that there should be accessibility upgrades
on the Crossrail line as it goes through the borough. So we certainly
raised it as part of the Petition.
768. CHAIRMAN: However, it was not discussed
in the Commons.
769. MR REED: It was not discussed in
the Commons, no. The reason being—
770. CHAIRMAN: It does not matter. However,
in order to get it clear, this is the first time it has been discussed.
771. MR REED: That is right. What I ask
your Lordships to bear in mind is that it does not indicate the
lack of importance that the issue holds for Newham.
772. CHAIRMAN: I am not saying anything
about it at all; I just wanted to make it clear that nobody has
previously had any submissions on this.
773. MR REED: That is right. Your Lordship
is hearing from Newham for the first time. The reasons why we
say that there ought to be full accessibility at these stations
are these: the Government (as I asked Dr Maynard) has identified
the importance of full accessibility or accessibility within the
railway system. We have looked at the provisions within Railways
for All with Dr Maynard, and we focus on those as the overarching
policy approach as to why it is there should be, generally, upgrading
at stations. This is a new railway, Newham say, and as a new railway
the opportunity should be taken to achieve that full accessibility
because it has the opportunity of forming habits.
774. My Lord, if I can turn to the two stations
in question, Manor Park and Maryland are, of course, two of the
37 stations on the Crossrail line. Thirty-seven stations and only
seven do not have step-free access. My Lord, seven do not have
step-free access and of those seven, of course, two are in the
Newham borough. It means, consequently, that there is a significant
number of the stations within Newham that are not going to have
that full, step-free accessibility. The context of that, Newham
says, is that there are high levels of deprivation (Mr West will
comment on that) within Newham borough; it is the fourth most-deprived
borough in London.
775. In that context, there is a greater significance,
Newham says, in not having full accessibility at those two stations
because the people who are not getting accessibility within their
area are, generally, likely to feel the cost of accessing other
stations more greatly. For example, going from the Manor Park
area to Forest Gate, if buses have to be taken, costs more money.
It costs more money particularly to those who are mobility restricted
as opposed to the disabled, because the mobility restricted will
not be able to get any benefits to take buses to access the fully
accessible stations. So there is a considerable importance, the
borough says, in making sure that its residents feel the full
benefit of Crossrail.
776. My Lord, you will hear from Mr West the
extent to which, for example, car ownership occurs within the
wards surrounding Manor Park and Maryland. I do not propose to
give the details at this stage, but it is apparent that they are
car ownership levels well below the national level. So, again,
being able to achieve what has been described by Dr Maynard as
a seamless transition to gain an opportunity to access the Crossrail
system is less likely to occur if what you have is limited car
ownership.
777. My Lord, in terms of Maryland, there is
a particular issue and it concerns the University of East London,
which has its campus close to Maryland Station. Mr West will deal
with that. That has a relevance because the number of students
that are disabled are much higher than the number of disabled
within the population generally. So there is a particular importance
in terms of making sure that Maryland is properly accessible.
778. If I turn briefly to the criteria that
have been applied, Crossrail tell us, in reaching a conclusion
as to whether or not Maryland and Manor Park should be made step-free,
it has been indicated that there has not been a cost-benefit analysis
of any of those particular stations; there has not, it appears,
been any detailed work as to whether the costs in question override
the benefits for step-free access (no doubt we will hear more
from Mr Berryman on that particular issue). If I look at those
specific criteria in the context of both Manor Park and Maryland,
the first issue, the significant distance of those stations—the
degree of distance from the wards surrounding those stations to
another accessible station—if I can just touch on Maryland
and its distance to Stratford, we have been told that it is 600
metres. Mr West will give evidence and he has undertaken a walk
along the route that one would take from Maryland to Stratford,
and you will hear that it is about 850 metres to access that particular
station—it is a considerable distance. What Mr West will
comment on is the extent to which, when one looks at it in the
context of buses and taxis, those do not provide a sufficient
opportunity to allow those mobility restricted people within and
about the Maryland and Manor Park areas with an acceptable level
of provision.
779. LORD SNAPE: Mr Reed (forgive me,
my Lord Chairman), did you not say, in cross-examination of Dr
Maynard this morning, that it was 700 metres between the two stations?
Now you have just said it is 850.
33 Committee Ref: A2, What Newham is Seeking (NEWMLB-53_05-026) Back
|
