§ Mr. THURTLE(by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister if he is prepared to find time for an early discussion of the Motion relating to the Channel Tunnel standing in the name of the hon. Member for Shoreditch (Mr. Thurtle) and others?—[That, in the view of this House, the construction of a Channel Tunnel would be advantageous both to this country and to Europe, as a whole, and the labour and material needed for the tunnel would increase productive employment in this country; therefore, having regard to the changed circumstances arising from diplomatic developments in Europe in recent years, the House invites the Government to take an early opportunity of reconsidering its attitude towards the project.]
§ The PRIME MINISTERIn view of the wide public interest in the Channel Tunnel project, the Government have come to the conclusion that the time is ripe for a comprehensive re-examination 21 of the question. We are anxious that a very thorough examination should he made of the economic aspects of the matter, in order that these may be weighed with Imperial Defence considerations, and a decision reached on broad grounds of national policy. In view of the time that would be required to carry the project through all its stages to the completion of the tunnel, we are convinced that it would be in the public interest, if possible, to deal with this important question outside of the party atmosphere and by agreement, so that the decision of one Government may not be upset by another. If the course adopted by the right Hon. Gentleman the Leader of the Opposition in 1924 should again commend itself to him and to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), I should like to proceed on similar lines, but obtaining their co-operation from the outset of the inquiry. In these circumstances, and more especially in view of the pressure on Parliamentary time, I am not prepared to accede to the request of the hon. Member.
§ Mr. THURTLEAm I to understand from the Prime Minister that his proposal is, in effect, that the matter should once again be referred to the consideration of the Committee of Imperial Defence?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI have given no details as to the form in which the examination will take place, but it is perfectly obvious that, on the defence side as opposed to the economic side, the Committee of Imperial Defence must be consulted.
§ Mr. THURTLEMay I ask if, in considering this, the right hon. Gentleman will bear in mind the fact that there is a very large body of opinion in the country which feels that the last word on this matter ought not necessarily to rest with the Committee of Imperial Defence?
§ Sir ROBERT HORNEMay I ask my right hon. Friend in what way he would propose to solve the economic problem— to whom reference would be made for that discussion?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThat is exactly the point I have to consider. I think the economic side of it is of the greatest importance and a side which, 22 certainly for some years past, has not been investigated. I have to consider what would be the best form, possibly after consultation with the right hon. Gentlemen whose names I have mentioned, to get the evidence which would be required.
§ Mr. BROMLEYCan the right hon. Gentleman tell the House if there has been any definite ascertainment of the greatest depth of the Channel under which the proposed tunnel would have to pass, and at what gradients the railway, either by steam or electricity, would have to run?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThat is exactly one of a hundred questions to which I desire an answer.