Examination of Witnesses (Questions 12900
- 12919)
12900. MR GOODMAN: Mr Schabas is my only
witness.
12901. CHAIRMAN: I wonder if you could
help me about this Cavendish Square proposal. Supposing that a
further assessment is made along the EIA lines. To what does that
lead? What would it lead to?
12902. MR GOODMAN: The further assessment
would look at the harm that would be created to local residents
by noise disturbance, lorry movements, and so on, and would thereby
provide—
12903. CHAIRMAN: — In the Cavendish
Square case?
12904. MR GOODMAN: — In the Cavendish
Square case and would thereby provide a mechanism for carrying
out a comparative analysis with regard to the Promoters' route.
12905. CHAIRMAN: What then would come
of this assessment?
12906. MR GOODMAN: That then offers the
opportunity for public comment and consultation to be made. That
is the intention.
12907. CHAIRMAN: And what would that
lead to?
12908. MR GOODMAN: Should that then raise
issues which are of concern to Parliament, the option it then
has is to act consistently with the directive and before granting
assent to the Act to allow further consideration of those measures.
Obviously that would have to be through an unusual procedure,
but that is the implication of the directive, that if you get
to a point where you are going to grant assent and you have not
carried out adequate environmental assessment, it would be contrary
to the clear intention of that directive that such assessment
be carried out and so where you came to that realisation it would
be necessary to find some way of accommodating that to ensure
that the objectives of the directive were complied with.
12909. CHAIRMAN: Would it not give Parliament
the opportunity of saying, "Oh well, after all, the Wigmore
Street and Cavendish Square route is the better one?" Is
that what you are after?
12910. MR GOODMAN: What I am after at
this stage is merely the proper opportunity for consultation and
comment.
12911. CHAIRMAN: I know you are but what
does it lead to? Does it lead to the possibility that Parliament
is going to be asked to adopt an alternative route?
12912. MR GOODMAN: There are two possibilities
but the primary one that I am concerned with is if it is then
acknowledged that this was a route that would be less harmful,
it leads to the field being opened up, say, to the Promoter that
in these circumstances we therefore expect much more stringent
conditions to be imposed, ensuring that the harm to existing residents
is minimised. I gave the example earlier: one can take reasonable
steps to secure against some form of harm or one can take best
practice methodologies, and just as there are different degrees
of stringency with which one can condition the way in which the
construction works are carried out, in that context, it is reasonable
to expect a more stringent set of conditions to be imposed which
gives a greater safeguard to those who are affected by it.
12913. CHAIRMAN: So it does not lead
to an alternative route but it leads to something in the nature
of an indemnity for people in Mayfair; is that right?
12914. MR GOODMAN: I do not think an
indemnity, I am not sure where that is coming from.
12915. CHAIRMAN: A more stringent level
of conditions in putting things right and all the rest of it?
12916. MR GOODMAN: Yes. I do not have
the full expertise on how a Code of Construction Practice works
but there are clearly best practice methodologies that can be
imposed and one might say in these circumstances we expect the
absolute best practice to be required.
12917. CHAIRMAN: Your clients have now
had for ages a list of all the provisions that are proposed to
be taken: they are in the information papers and in the Codes
of Practice, and all the rest of it, and some of them are in undertakings.
Which ones do you want to improve?
12918. MR GOODMAN: My Lord, many of them
are in the Petition itself and are set out in detail there. I
was trying to steer clear of going into the vast amount of detail
that has been put into the Petition but there are many examples
within that of the kinds of things—
12919. CHAIRMAN: I am afraid we have
got a very difficult point here. If you are saying that this does
not lead to an alternative route but it does lead to more stringent
conditions being imposed on Crossrail, or the nominated undertaker
when it comes to the point, we will need to know which ones.
| 
