Examination of Witnesses (Questions 8140
- 8159)
8140. MR GEORGE: My Lord, before I ask
my questions, can I just say three things. Firstly, I am here
representing English Welsh and Scottish Railways who are one of
the most substantial freight operators and also run passenger
charter trains. Secondly, we very much welcome the Promoters'
new position this morning that we are going to have sight of the
proposed railway clauses amendments, albeit on a slightly provisional
basis, but we very much welcome that and I hope that the Promoters
will consider overnight whether they can give an undertaking to
the Committee that the amendments, when they are put before the
Public Bill Committee, will not be materially different in their
impact on private interests from those which we are going to see
today or tomorrow. If that be the position, then of course the
difference between us and them as to whether they will formally
be before this Committee or not will disappear because we will
have that reassurance.
8141. CHAIRMAN: I just do not think we
have got the mechanism to do it in this Committee and it will
have to be done on the floor of the House.
8142. MR GEORGE: But, wherever it is
done, it has been agreed, as I understand it, that we can make
comments to this Committee on them and I say that that is very
helpful, but what we need to know is that what we have got as
a draft will not materially worsen when it is formally put before
the other Committee. That should be a very easy matter for the
Promoters to consider.
8143. CHAIRMAN: I shall leave you to
discuss that with Mr Elvin.
8144. MR GEORGE: So far as the rest of
the timetable is concerned, my Lords, it is not yet clear whether
we need trouble your Lordships this Thursday, but of course we
will inform the Committee as soon as we can if there has been
an agreement before then, and we shall be back next week on Wednesday
and possibly Thursday when we are already programmed.
8145. CHAIRMAN: But you were doing site-specific
cases this week, were you not?
8146. MR GEORGE: That is right and it
may be that we shall not need to trouble you with those matters.
Cross-examined by MR
BERRYMAN
8147. MR GEORGE: Now, Mr Berryman, the
one document I have asked you to have is a copy of the Bill itself
because what I am concerned with in my questions is the infrastructure
works which you have so helpfully explained to the Committee earlier
this morning, and the diagrams were placed on the board. If we
take the Bill for a moment, it is clause 1, is it not, on page
1 of the Bill which gives the power to construct, and maintain,
scheduled works? Then, when we look at it, we can see that 1(b)
is works which are either side of the central tunnel.
(Mr Berryman) That is correct, yes.
8148. And (c) is works consequent or incidental
and, if we then move on in the Bill to page 40, we have Schedule
1 where we have a large number of individual works running for
a number of pages and, just to give an example, if we go to page
58, half-way down the page to work 3/11, that is those new works
at that junction with the Heathrow Express railway which you put
up a diagram of and explained that that was the most substantial
of the various works in the Bill to which you were referring the
Committee this morning.[39]
(Mr Berryman) That is correct, yes.
8149. Likewise, so far as the Greenford works
are concerned which you referred to, if we go to page 59, that
is work 3/16, is it not?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is correct.
8150. So each of those works, which the Committee
has heard about this morning, ties into the Bill with a specific
works number and, if the Bill receives Royal Assent, you, that
is Crossrail, are then empowered to construct those works?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is correct.
8151. In a number of cases, those works require
the acquisition of some private land and, therefore, the Bill
also gives a compulsory purchase power in respect of those matters?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is correct, yes. That is the main
function of the Bill, to provide those powers and to allow for
that compulsory purchase, as I think you know.
8152. And those works are in the Bill because
at the present time, in Crossrail's view, they are necessary for
the construction and thereafter the proper operation of Crossrail?
(Mr Berryman) Well, they may be necessary, yes. What the
works are describing, I think, is the maximum extent of the works
which would be necessary for the proper operation of Crossrail.
8153. But you can only put forward works and
compulsory powers and so forth if at the present time you think
that they are reasonably necessary, and that is the view taken,
is it not, because, otherwise, you could not possibly come to
Parliament with them seeking the powers?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, quite so.
8154. Now, so far as the Environmental Statement
is concerned, which has been carried out in accordance with European
and domestic law, that has assumed, has it not, that all the works
which are contained in the Bill and indeed those which came in
through additional provisions are constructed and that is all
dealt with, is that not right, in the Environmental Statement?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is correct, the Environmental Statement
describes in detail how the works will be carried out and built.
8155. And there is no Environmental Statement
before this House or indeed the other House which shows the position
if those works were not included?
(Mr Berryman) No, there is not, although I think it would
be a safe thing to say that, if the works were not built, the
environmental position would be exactly as it is now.
8156. The answer is that we just do not know.
Insofar as some of those works are necessary, if they were not
built, there would be different consequences and whether those
would be better or worse we cannot tell from reading the Environmental
Statement because they have not been assessed yet, have they?
(Mr Berryman) No, that is true, but I would go back to my
point of a few moments ago, that, if we do not build works, then
the situation will not change from that which exists at the present
time. The purpose of the environmental assessment was to establish
the impacts of the works which are built.
8157. That I understand, but, if you did not
build these works, the Crossrail system and indeed the other services
might not be able to function and the Environmental Statement,
for very obvious reasons, has not considered what would happen
in those circumstances because it has been assessing the position
if the works in the Bill are constructed.
(Mr Berryman) That is correct, yes, of course it has been
doing that. The works in the Bill which are constructed, it will
need to be ascertained that the works which are constructed are
sufficient for the purpose which they are intended to serve. That
is a slightly different issue than the Environmental Statement,
is it not?
8158. Well, I leave the Environmental Statement
because I think we are in agreement on that. Now, if we turn to
the modelling and timetabling that has been done, the timetabling
is based on the output of the modelling that has been done, is
it not? You do your modelling, you have the outputs of the modelling
and you can then do your timetabling? (Mr Berryman) Yes,
that is a way of expressing it. I would put it slightly differently,
that you prepare your timetable, you model it and ascertain whether
it works or not and, if it does not work, you go back to an iterative
process to modify the timetable or modify the infrastructure in
such a way that you can make it work.
8159. In the very simplest of terms, you are
trying to see that you can run the appropriate number of Crossrail
trains while at the same stage running the appropriate number
of other passenger trains and freight trains. That is the purpose
behind the modelling and the timetabling, is it not?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, absolutely right. That is
exactly what it is for.
39 Crossrail Bill [HL Bill 14 (2007-08)] Schedule
1- Scheduled works (SCN-20080422-003) Back
|
