Select Committee on the Crossrail Bill Minutes of Evidence

Examination of Witnesses (Questions 4640 - 4659)

  4640. MR ELVIN: It is in the green book, volume 5, and the Commons heard from the same Petitioners that you have heard from this week. I am just trying to find it, but it was a lengthy day. I wonder if your Lordships would like the coffee break while I am trying to find it rather than keep you waiting while I find the section.

  4641. CHAIRMAN: That is a very good idea.

After a short break

  4642. CHAIRMAN: Mr Elvin, you were showing us in your submission some of the events and on page 8 you deal with, I think it is, SES3.

  4643. MR ELVIN: That is correct, my Lord.

  4644. CHAIRMAN: When was that produced?

  4645. MR ELVIN: I think it was November 2006.

  4646. CHAIRMAN: The House of Commons Select Committee was still sitting?

  4647. MR ELVIN: It sat until October 2007.

  4648. CHAIRMAN: So, from that moment on, there was the possibility for the public to know that consideration was being given to an alternative alignment in Spitalfields?

  4649. MR ELVIN: Yes, and, my Lords, I said I would give you the references. Ms Jordan, who instructs Mr Horton at least for one of these Petitions, she raised, and put before the Commons Committee, the 2001 report on alignment B. It is volume 5, pages 1760 to 1763. She showed the Commons the plan that you have seen and she made the point that it was a perfectly viable route, that it is not severely obstructed with buildings, and she complained that there was not a proper report behind it, making essentially the same points that Mr Horton makes. These points were made between paragraphs 18698 and 18704 and I responded to them in due course, referring in part to SES3 at 18710. Part of the issue was concerned with the location of the Hanbury Street shaft, but it was also concerned with option B.

  4650. CHAIRMAN: I am just trying to find the date of this.

  4651. MR ELVIN: It is 30 January 2007, the date that the Commons considered these matters.

  4652. CHAIRMAN: But the Petition was before that obviously. The Petition must have been dated earlier than that.

  4653. MR ELVIN: This came in on the back of AP3, I think, but we had already accepted that there would be an opportunity to come back when we put in the additional material on the Hanbury Street shaft and the southern alignment, so it had already been agreed the previous summer that these Petitioners could come back and make any points about the additional information we put in.

  4654. CHAIRMAN: And they did.

  4655. MR ELVIN: And they did, including the report of March 2001. Therefore, AP4 on Woolwich was not deposited until May of 2007. There would have been, had the Commons Committee thought it appropriate, opportunity to promote an AP. The matter was clearly before the Commons at Third Reading and ----

  4656. CHAIRMAN: Yes, but before we get to the Third Reading, it would have been possible for the Select Committee in the Commons to ask for an additional provision to deal with this route?

  4657. MR ELVIN: It would have been. They took the view similar to your Lordships, that it traversed the principle of the Bill and they were not prepared to, but it would have been open to them because, as your Lordships know, it is a matter for the Committee to decide what the principle of the Bill is.

  4658. CHAIRMAN: Well, I think the additional provisions add to the principle of the Bill.

  4659. MR ELVIN: Yes, and we were already making various amendments. Just as a point of information, the Petition date that was heard in January 2007 was December 2006.

previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2008