Clause 7
Crossrail Bill
9:45 am
Stephen Hammond (Shadow Minister, Transport; Wimbledon, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 8, in clause 7, page 4, line 17, at end insert
‘providing it is in within 50 metres of the outer limits of deviation for the scheduled works’.
The Secretary of State has the power compulsorily to purchase land for Crossrail and its construction on the designated route and on land outside the designated route, but within the limits of deviation. However, the clause goes well beyond that. It gives the Secretary of State powers compulsorily to purchase land
“outside the limits of deviation for the scheduled works and the limits of land to be acquired or used which is required for or in connection with the works authorised”.
That seems to be an extraordinary power.
There is a dedicated route and, understandably, there may need to be deviations from that route for the work to progress, and as the work progresses there will be a need for flexibility, hence the need for the power to acquire land within the limits of deviation. There may be a need to acquire land alongside the route, so as to facilitate the building of the railway or to support the railway when it is operational. All that is understood. To cover both those eventualities, a deviation from the route has been proposed.
That deviation is certainly necessary and it has been specified. However, the clause goes well beyond that, as it allows the compulsory purchase of land
“outside the limits of deviation for the scheduled works”,
which means that the Secretary of State may compulsorily acquire any land that she deems necessary for building Crossrail, wherever it may be.
There are questions that the Minister must answer to the Committee’s satisfaction. For example, why will land necessary only for construction, which is surely the land approximate to the route, fall outside the limits of deviation? Surely, along the designated route, the limits of deviation have been set so as to anticipate all necessary diversions from it. The limits of deviation as specified should be, and are, adequate. The worrying aspect of the clause is that it brings to mind the Martini principle: the Secretary of State can acquire land anywhere and at any time that she deems necessary for the construction of Crossrail. What is the purpose of that?
The Secretary of State is potentially being granted extraordinary powers, and there is a potential cost to the public purse that is wholly disproportionate to that need. My amendment—I hope the Minister will be even more tempted by this one—would allow the extra flexibility that he craves, but also define it. The Secretary of State would have power to acquire land outside the deviation, but limited to 50 m, which is an adequate restriction that would cover all eventualities for construction or land running alongside the route. The amendment would also allow for any circumstances along the confines of the route that anyone could envisage in respect of land acquisition being necessary.
This equally tempting amendment would grant the Secretary of State the exceptional powers that the Minister desires while placing a limit on the flexibility that he requires.