Examination of Witnesses (Questions 8200
- 8219)
8200. MR GEORGE: Thank you very much.
8201. LORD YOUNG OF NORWOOD GREEN: I am thinking
how to frame this question. Mr Berryman, I understand the point
you were making, you were saying we may not have to carry out
some of these proposed amendments because circumstances may change.
I am now trying to address Mr George's concerns who said, well,
if you did not, are there any circumstances where EWS would be
disadvantaged as a result of that?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, my Lord, if we did not do some of the
works, it is possible that EWS and/or the freight operators would
be disadvantaged, but what we are saying is that their reliance
must be on the Office of the Rail Regulator to make sure that
that does not happen and if we do not achieve the outputs from
the modelling and it is not agreed by the Timetable Referencing
Group and so on then, as I said a moment ago, we cannot draw down
those rights which are provisionally allocated to us.
8202. LORD YOUNG OF NORWOOD GREEN: Okay, so
they are allocated on the basis of you achieving ---
(Mr Berryman) Achieving this standard of output, yes.
8203. LORD BROOK OF ALVERTHORPE: Why
is it not possible to devise a formula which guarantees the presently
proposed allocation of pathways, no matter how you get there,
but nonetheless a formula and you can have the flexibility you
want to deliver it?
8204. MR ELVIN: I wonder if your Lordship
would allow me to put up part of the ORR's decision because that
was the point I was going to raise with Mr Berryman.[40]
Your Lordship might like to see the way the ORR is going about
it. At 71 and 72, I think your Lordship will find that that is
the way the ORR has gone about it.
8205. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: I should be
a regulator then, should I not, split the difference! I do not
think it is quite the guarantee that I was seeking to achieve
with my proposal.
8206. MR ELVIN: Would your Lordship allow
me to ask some questions to see if I can help your Lordship. Mr
Berryman, the way the Regulator has set it, the capacity improvements
to offset Crossrail have been modelled and are accepted by the
ORR as part of the assessment?
(Mr Berryman) That is correct, yes, the modelling was done
by Network Rail but the ORR has accepted that.
8207. That includes freight growth to 2015?
(Mr Berryman) It does indeed.
8208. The standard that is then set of the 92
per cent minimum PPM is on the basis of that modelled capacity?
(Mr Berryman) Yes, that is quite right.
8209. What is the incentive to Crossrail to
ensure that the improvements are carried out, the effects of which
have been built into the assumptions by the ORR? What is the mechanism
which secures delivery of the infrastructure capacity to generate
the 92 per cent?
(Mr Berryman) You can see in clause 73 there that the requirement
is that Crossrail services should demonstrate an ability to run
92 per cent for a period after the initial service commitment
phase, in other words, that is part of the deal. If we cannot
achieve that PPM standard—
8210. CHAIRMAN: I think elsewhere in
the decision they say what will happen if you do not?
(Mr Berryman) Indeed they do, my Lord.
8211. CHAIRMAN: They say Crossrail rights
would be lost at this stage.
8212. MR ELVIN: So there is a stick to
go with the 92 per cent that a condition will be imposed on the
access option which will take away rights. What impact would that
have on the business case and the provision of Crossrail services?
(Mr Berryman) It would be very unfortunate, to put it mildly.
8213. Other than euphemisms, I think Lord Brooke
is looking for some idea of what sort of incentive it provides.
How effective a mechanism is it likely to be?
(Mr Berryman) The fact of the matter is that the money invested
in the railway, leaving aside for a second the infrastructure
improvement works that we are talking about now, is going to be
in excess of £14 billion. If you did not get these rights
because you had not done the right infrastructure works on the
Great Western Main Line in particular (that is where most of the
works are) then you just would not be able to run the trains and
you would have invested £14 billion with effectively nothing
to show for this, or very little, a nice hole in the ground but
no trains.
8214. And the issues of accountability and heads
rolling and the like if you cannot meet the services necessary
to justify the vast public expenditure?
(Mr Berryman) Fortunately I shall be long ago retired when
that happens.
8215. MR ELVIN: I think I will as well
at this rate!
8216. LORD SNAPE: You can give us a guarantee
then Mr Berryman!
8217. CHAIRMAN: Lord James, I think you
wanted to ask a question.
8218. LORD JAMES OF BLACKHEATH: Yes I
do, please. I have struggled as best I can to follow this tortuous
dialogue process this morning and I have to confess that I am
not entirely clear on a great many aspects of it. I want to put
a question to you which I do not think is coming up anywhere else
in the debate but which worried me because you put your finger
on a flashpoint for me this morning when you put up on the screen
one of the pictures and identified where the Paddington rail disaster
occurred and also some of the preventative action alleviating
that risk for the future, which is fine. This is a question which
arises, as most of our questions do, out of experience. I used
to chair the Risk Assessment Committee for Lloyd's of London and
my task was to assess with that Committee the ten unimaginable
disasters that nobody could think of that could occur in the world.
What have you done in this whole process to subject this to the
unimaginable risk factors which could come out of the creation
of this structure which is as yet unknown?
8219. MR ELVIN: Is your Lordship asking
Mr Berryman to imagine the unimaginable?
40 Crossrail Ref: P55, The Office of Rail Regulation's
decision on the application for a Track Access Option for Crossrail
passenger services on Network Rail's network, Paras 71-73, 14
April 2008 (SCN-20080422-004) Back
| 
