HC Deb 26 February 1975 vol 887 cc490-1
23. Mr. Speed

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what further steps the Government propose to take to secure financial support from overseas for the construction of the Channel Tunnel; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Crosland

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member for Christchurch and Lymington (Mr. Adley) on 28th January.—[Vol. 885, c. 153–4.]

Mr. Speed

In view of the recent debate on this matter by the European Parliament, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government are looking either at direct cash aid or at guarantees from the European Investment Bank?

Mr. Crosland

There is a misunderstanding, as there was throughout the debate. It was not the shortage of loan funds which caused the Government to take the decision to abandon the project. The reason was that the companies were trying to enforce a date which we were not prepared to accept. With regard to the debate which has been referred to, the Commissioner, Signor Mugnozza, said firmly that the Commission had no means or resources of its own to offer to Governments, and the resources of the European Investment Bank would be irrelevant to a project of this size.

Mr. Skinner

Does my right hon. Friend recall that his hon. Friend the Under-Secretary showed glee in announcing housing figures for 1974 which showed an improvement on 1973? One suspects that those figures will improve further during the year. Is my right hon. Friend, like me—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] We have been known to vote in the same Lobby on occasions. Is he, like me, prepared to give consideration to the fact that one of the reasons why the figures are better is that we tended to concentrate our resources more sharply and clearly upon housing requirements? In that event, whether the Common Market aids us or not, we cannot afford to use our resources on projects such as the Channel Tunnel.

Mr. Crosland

I am flattered that my hon. Friend can see so clearly the resemblance between us. As to the substance of his question, I cannot wholly agree with my hon. Friend since I have pointed out—and this matter will come up again in the next Question—that the resources we save by not going ahead with the tunnel will not be available for housing or anything else. Those resources will be required to finance alternative forms of transport investment to move the same number of people across the Channel in different ways.