Examination of Witnesses (Questions 5860
- 5879)
5860. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: If
I recollect correctly from your explanation last week, you said
very clearly you hope people would enter into the Deed with you
but, on the other hand, if they choose not to, that was perfectly
okay for them to so do and presumably they could then seek to
enter into a further deed as a different deed with you?
5861. MR MOULD: That is right. I am so
sorry, could I get that last point?
5862. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: They
could presumably seek to enter into a further agreement with you
and possibly a different deed. In the event of failing to agree,
there is recourse to a form of arbitration, is there not?
5863. MR MOULD: What we hope and would
expect is this, that those who are eligible for the Deed—and
I explained in simple terms the eligibility criteria last week—people
would take advantage of the process, the contractual arrangements,
which the Deed offers and we hope that when we come to finalise
the terms of the Settlement Deed with any given proprietor that
would be a once and for all negotiation which would set terms
that are acceptable both to the Promoter and to the proprietor
in question so we would not anticipate there would be a need for
any further contingent discussions to take place. The opportunity
to enter into a deed under our policy remains in relation to those
who are eligible to do so until, I think, we have said some nine
or ten months or so prior to the occurrence of the works beneath
their property. What we have done is we have envisaged we need
some time in advance of tunnelling under the property in which
to get the arrangements finalised but if you think back to what
I told you last week about Spitalfields, we do not anticipate
the tunnel-boring machines will be going underneath Spitalfields
until about 2012 so there remains a period of some years, shall
we say, for the sake of robustness, 2011 as the end point, there
remains a period of some three years within which we would expect
eligible proprietors within the Spitalfields area to finalise
negotiations with us for the Settlement Deed that applies to their
property. We are at a stage in an ongoing process is really the
point, yes.
5864. CHAIRMAN: Mr Mould, you have had
no notice of the things that were written into this document over
the adjournment today?
5865. MR MOULD: That is true.
5866. CHAIRMAN: But a number of them
were said to you in 2006?
5867. MR MOULD: They were.
5868. CHAIRMAN: What have you done about
those?
5869. MR MOULD: What we have done is
when we received that document and we received from Ms Jones on
1 June 2006 a track changed version, I think, broadly in accordance
with the same document, yes, at that time we were about to embark
upon a review of the then current version of the Settlement Deed
and we did embark on that. In the course of that review we considered
a number of points, some of which related to the issues that she
raised in her draft. What we did not do—and this I regret—was
to write back to Ms Jones.
5870. CHAIRMAN: You did not tell her?
5871. MR MOULD: No, that is right. The
position is that I can well understand the point that she makes
to you today that she is uncertain as to the degree to which her
points were considered in detail or obviously carried into whatever
iteration of the current state of the Deed took effect thereafter
and there may have been others since then, so that is the position.
That being the case, from her perspective it is not an entirely
satisfactory state of affairs that she should be left without
any response from us on those points. What I had in mind—
5872. CHAIRMAN: Just a minute because
I am going to go on to what we do next. I think first Lord James
has a question.
5873. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: Mr Mould,
I was intrigued by your use of words just now when asked for an
explanation on this. You said that the actual tunnelling equipment
would not go into operation until 2012, but surely by the time
you reach 2012 there is little choice about which direction you
are going to unleash that beast because already so many other
factors have had to take place in, around and on the surface so
you could go in no other direction but that route.
5874. MR MOULD: There is no question
of any significant change in the alignment of the tunnels or the
direction in which the tunnels are driven. Both those matters
are fixed by the Bill, as indeed was one of the underlying points
that my Lord, the Lord Chairman, mentioned in giving his ruling
this morning. Equally, the degree to which there is room for deviation
within the proposed alignments is very limited. I think we mentioned,
for example, that in terms of horizontal deviation the limits
are in this area limited to some three metres from the current
line which is broadly at around 30 to 35 metres of track.
5875. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: It seemed
to me what you were not saying but what you probably meant to
say was that the actual resolution of any outstanding points has
to be done far in advance because there is no flexibility for
amendment afterwards; 2012 is a fact which cannot be changed,
as to what you do then, because of what you decide now. Those
matters have to be resolved in a timely manner now.
5876. MR MOULD: I think there are two
separate points, if I may say so. The alignment of the railway
and the depth at which the tunnels will be driven is essentially
fixed; it is subject to detailed design, as you know, but it is
essentially fixed. The investigation and assessment of the ground
response beneath Spitalfields, both as a matter of generality
and as regards individual Petitioners' properties, has also been
the subject of assessment and we explained something about that
process during the course of the hearings last week. That is the
subject of further review, and one of the things that the Settlement
Deed does is to provide a contractual entitlement to those proprietors
who have the benefit of a Deed in relation to their property to
the staged settlement assessment process that I described to you.
5877. In many cases—for example, in the
case of all listed buildings in Spitalfields—we have already
reached the first part of Stage 3 of that assessment. So the way
I put it last week was the Deed will provide an opportunity for
the building owner to call for the nominated undertaker to review
the results of that phased assessment with a view, for example,
to taking account of any particular points that they, as the proprietor,
would wish, as regards their building—
5878. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: I did
not hear you say, as I feared I heard you say, that these decisions
are not of immediate consequence and do not need to be taken now,
because there is flexibility up to 2012. That was what was worrying
me.
5879. MR MOULD: Not as regards the continuing
consideration of the likely response of the building to the tunnelling
process and the ground movement that is likely to result from
it. That is right.
| 
