CHANNEL TUNNEL (Hansard, 10 July 1969)

§ Q6. Mr. Whitaker
asked the Prime Minister whether he will co-ordinate the work of the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Housing and Local Government and the Department of Economic Affairs concerned with the project for a Channel Tunnel.

§ The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport already works in close consultation with my right hon. Friends the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs and the Minister of Housing and Local Government, and with all other Ministers concerned in this matter.

§ Mr. Whitaker
After 50 years of talk, is it not now time for some action on the Channel Tunnel? Has co-ordinated contingency planning already started, for the effects on South-East England if the Channel Tunnel goes ahead will be considerable?

§ The Prime Minister
A great deal more action has been taken in the last two or three years than in all the previous 1572 47 which my hon. Friend has mentioned. He will know that a project team of officials was set up in 1966. We are now awaiting some settlement of the problem of the raising of the money by private enterprise groups, and no settlement has yet been reached with one or more of those groups. We have given much thought to the South-East contingency plan based on provisional plans for the Tunnel, although we regard the Tunnel as serving the whole of the country. We do not believe that the idea should be to get a vast industrial complex near the Tunnel entrance, but that the Tunnel should be regarded as a means of carrying British exports to France and the rest of the Continent from every manufacturing area in Britain.

§ Mr. Boyd-Carpenter
Are the financial groups concerned still insisting on Government guarantees of the capital put in? If they are, does not that raise some doubts as to the economic viability of the project?

§ The Prime Minister
I do not think that that is the main stumbling block at the moment. I should like to look into the exact state of the negotiations between representatives of the two Governments and the groups. So far, the proposals put forward by the financial groups do not meet our requirements, and they have gone back to consider new proposals.

§ Mrs. Renée Short
Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is more than one point of view about the kind of Channel link which should be built? Will he confirm an undertaking given to the House by his right hon. Friend that there will be a full and early opportunity to discuss the proposals which the Government are considering before any final decision is made?

§ The Prime Minister
Our view of the different forms of link with the Continent was announced some time ago. Any question of a debate is, of course, a matter for my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House.

§ Sir T. Beamish
Is it not a fact that the Government definitely favour this immensely costly project? Why has there not been a White Paper on the subject, and why has the House not been consulted?

§ The Prime Minister
I thought that there had been a statement to the House. I will consider whether in the period since then enough material has accumulated to justify a White Paper or a further statement.

§ Mr. Crouch
Is the Prime Minister aware that, until a decision is made, plans for road development in the South-East, particularly for roads to the Channel ports, will continue to have low priority with the Minister of Transport? Will he look at this as a matter of urgency because of the danger which arises from the heavy congestion of traffic on these roads?

§ The Prime Minister
Yes, Sir. However, in his road plans, which have been published recently, my right hon. Friend has had the Channel Tunnel very much in mind. If we were able to get over the difficulties, the Channel Tunnel project should be operating well within the period of the next ten-year road plan. The hon. Member will also remember that there was a full discussion of matters connected with Channel Tunnel planning during the Committee and Report stages of last year's Transport Act. Indeed, there was great feeling about the addition of the Channel Tunnel provisions to that Measure. The House was fairly fully informed of all these matters in those debates.

§ Mr. Shinwell
Could we have an assurance from my right hon. Friend that there will be no question of going into the Common Market until the Channel Tunnel is completed?

§ The Prime Minister
I do not think that I am in a position to give that assurance, nor can I give the assurance that we will not complete the Channel Tunnel until we have got into the Common Market.

§ Mr. Bessell
Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that, in spite of the progress which has been made in the last three years, any delay in reaching a decision on this matter is a hindrance to industry and road developments? In those circumstances, can he undertake to make a statement to the House as quickly as possible?

§ The Prime Minister
I certainly agree that this is an important project. It is also a project in which we believe that the resources, or a substantial part of 1574 them, should come from private sources and not from funds voted by this House. I am referring now to the cost of construction. That was a decision reached by the two Governments. As soon as there is anything to inform the House about I will ensure that a statement is made by my right hon. Friend.

§ Mr. Sheldon
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that before work begins on the Channel Tunnel an up-to-date review will be made of the 1963 White Paper, because that White Paper introduced by the Party opposite falls well below the standards that we have come to expect from White Papers, and there are certain inaccuracies in it? Quite apart from that, the whole method of dealing with this problem needs to be brought up to date.

§ The Prime Minister
When the two Governments decided, in October 1966, on the basis on which work could proceed, that was the result of a very fundamental reappraisal following that White Paper of 1963. A great deal has changed, including some estimates both of cost and of the prospects of economic benefit resulting from this. I will certainly consider whether and when more information could be given to the House compared with the 1963 White Paper.

§ Sir A. V. Harvey
Since the statement was made in the House, will the Prime Minister take into account the rapid improvement in hovercraft services and the future development of this type of aircraft, which could have a good bearing on transportation, not only upon sea but upon rail transport? Would it not be a good thing if the House could debate this matter at a fairly early date?

§ The Prime Minister
Yes. As the Minister who, nearly 20 years ago, introduced the N.R.D.C. Bill into the House, which pioneered the hovercraft and brought it to its present success, I join with the hon. Gentleman in praising what has been achieved. I do not think that it could be a substitute for the economic benefits envisaged from the Channel Tunnel. However, I have to tell the House that there are still a great number of problems to be ironed out in relation to the Tunnel, not only to do with the question of the financial groups.
1575 Recent Press speculation, which surprised me, saying that I was rushing ahead with this—this is the first I have heard of it—is very wide of the mark. Arrangements for the co-operation of the two countries are going ahead smoothly, but this is an enormous project and we must get it right before final decisions are taken.