Examination of Witnesses (Questions 2740
- 2759)
2740. MR ELVIN: My Lord, I wonder, would
it be helpful if I explain how we understood Mr Carpenter's position?
2741. CHAIRMAN: Yes, that would be very
helpful indeed.
2742. MR ELVIN: The position is this.
Mr Carpenter and the Residents' Association wish to see a different
alignment and they are interested in what has been called the
southern alignments.[2]
2743. CHAIRMAN: I am very well aware
of that, I want to know what the southern alignment is.
2744. MR ELVIN: There were three options
considered and if someone could find it while I am on my feet.
A report was produced which was disclosed to Mr Carpenter and
his association and others in October of last year which was a
new report which simply went again through the various alignments
and compared them and came to the same conclusion that had been
reached earlier, namely that the Bill scheme was the preferable
alignment without prejudice to our view about the principle of
the Bill. What Mr Carpenter wanted was the earlier drafts of that
report, he having had the final report in October—it was
only produced in October. He was given the final draft of that
report, so he has had one draft of it already in January, and
what he wants is the endlessly going back, the regressive earlier
drafts of the report and he has been refused that. His complaint
under FOI has been rejected and he has appealed to the FOI Commissioner
against the loss of his appeal and our position is simply one
cannot go to endlessly regressive drafts of these matters: he
has had the final report, he has had the draft of the report.
2745. CHAIRMAN: I do not want to go into
these arguments because effectively that is for the Information
Commissioner.
2746. MR ELVIN: Yes, but what Mr Carpenter
is after is the earlier draft reports of the report he has already
received, both in final form and in the form of the June 2007
draft and that is the essence of his complaint.
2747. CHAIRMAN: Is there a plan which
shows in some shape or form what it is that is the route that
Mr Carpenter wants the train route to take?
2748. MR ELVIN: If you allow Mr Berryman,
he will point broadly to the alignment that Mr Carpenter is referring
to. It is not even one that is dealt with on this plan, it is
in an earlier report which he has already had disclosed. There
were some 19 or 20 earlier alignment reports disclosed to this
association two or three years ago and we have various documentation
showing what they disclosed, if the Committee needs to see it
but, broadly speaking, there were a number of southern alignments
considered and rejected. As far as we are aware, My Lord, Mr Carpenter
has not at any stage indicated any particular alignment which
he wishes to see. He wishes to see simply an alignment other than
the current one.
2749. MR CARPENTER: Could I just answer
that?
2750. CHAIRMAN: Yes, of course. I want
to get this sorted out at this stage.
2751. MR CARPENTER: Because the Spitalfields'
Petition is going this week it was suggested that we each dealt
with a different part of the common concerns.
2752. CHAIRMAN: That is a very good idea.
2753. MR CARPENTER: Which we are doing.
There will be a detailed presentation on the southern route which
another group has been working on. Although I am requesting those
documents, because we have been receiving previous documents,
we have divided it up and apportioned it up so that through the
week you will deal with different impacts and different concerns.
I am a bit flustered because we have already apportioned who will
deal with each section.
2754. CHAIRMAN:Who is dealing with the
alternative alignment?
2755. MR CARPENTER: That will be the
Spitalfields Society and the SSBA.
2756. CHAIRMAN: Not you?
2757. MR CARPENTER: I was not going to
bring you plans. That will be done by someone else, who can bring
you plans and explain them, so that we do not all do the same
thing.
2758. CHAIRMAN: You are the one who is
not ready because you do not have the material under the FOI procedures.
2759. MR CARPENTER: That is right. We
have started out dealing with that. We received originally the
2001 reports. I think we were the only ones who received those.
We have looked at the alternatives. The 2001 reports were the
main alternatives studied by the LUL Crossrail incarnation. We
have followed that trail for many years. I have been dealing with
this for over four years now. We obviously work together with
other groups in Spitalfields and other people. When it comes to
committee, I believe Kate Jordan will present that. She is a qualified
architecture so is someone who can deal much better with the nitty-gritty
of maps and the technical details rather than, say, me. We have
tried to follow the instructions of the Committee in apportioning
different sections, but it is not because we are not all concerned
about the same things. We most definitely are all concerned about
the same things.
2 Crossrail Ref: P23, Southern Alignment Route Options,
Map RTS C8(iv) (LINEWD-SES3RTS-007) Back
| 
