GLC inquiry row
Page 4
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
1HE GREATER London Council's orry ban inquiry got off to a :ontroversial start last week tvhen environmentalists staged walk-on demonstration and in.:tired the wrath of one of the ninel members. ALAN MILLAR .eports.
Transport 2000 director Nick _ester presented a cardboard nodel lorry with "I'm Audrey — an me" daubed on one side to he panel as a reminder of what, n Transport 2000's view, is the nquiry's aim.
But this gesture prompted Erik iechnitz, the Transport and Gen)ral Workers Union representaive on the nine-strong panel, to )ursue Mr Lester into the corriiors of County Hall and remonsrate with him over an apparent ibuse of the inquiry.
Both parties were placated by 3LC transport committee chair )ave Wetzel who explained that t had been intended that the nodel be presented on the steps )f County Hall instead.
Last Wednesday's opening )ublic session was very much a 'getting-to-know-you" exercise, n which the independent inqury chairman, Derek Wood, ex)Iained the aims of the £130,000 nquiry.
Organisations and individuals interested in supplying evidence to the inquiry have until December 31 to submit written material, although Mr Wood did reassure several anxious parties that, if they indicate that their evidence is of an interim nature, that deadline will be extended in specific cases.
It will meet for several one-day reading sessions between now and Christmas, and then daily from January, when it will start to hear oral evidence.
Mr Wood explained that these sessions will probably be grouped into sessions to hear evidence from groups with a common interest of point of view, and he indicated that they will continue to be heard into February, and possibly March next year.
The inquiry budget includes funds for research, and Mr Wood said that the panel will be prepared to undertake some research in areas which suffer from lorry problems. There also is a possibility of some evening sessions being arranged in order to accommodate those who are unable to attend day-time hearings.
From March; it will start to assess the evidence and prepare a report which it is hoped will be ready around Easter, which falls on April 12, While Mr Wood said he could not guarantee that the Easter deadline would be met, Dave Wetzel told CM that he en
visaged that the only delay might amount to the panel compiling its report over Easter.
Mr Wetzel also indicated that he was disturbed by the proportion of the inquiry budget which is allocated to the chairman's "pools win"-sized Queen's Counsel salary. Other panel members will be compensated for any loss of earnings.
According to Mr Wetzel, the fact that the panel (CM October 31) comprises eight members representing potentially conflicting interests will not be a handicap. And he suggested that the inclusion of independent assessors on the Armitage Inquiry had not been a success.
He added that he considered that the Armitage Report did not meet London's specific problems sufficiently.