NO GOVERNMENT FUNDS OR GUARANTEES FOR THE TUNNEL SYSTEM (Hansard, 21 July 1987)

§ Mr. David Mitchell
I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
With this we shall take Lords amendments Nos. 7 and 78.

§ Mr. Mitchell
These amendments were made by the Select Committee in another place in response to the petition of the British Ports Association. The BPA accepted clause 2(2), which provides that the concessionaires should not be barred from eligibility for the funds equally available to others. However, it was concerned about the Government's power to grant-aid transport projects under section 56(1) of the Transport Act 1968. The Government did not intend that that power should be used to grant-aid the Channel tunnel. We were therefore able to accept the amendment to clause 2 and a similar amendment to clause 40 to prevent the payment of grant aid under the 1968 Act in respect of British Rail's international services.

Mr. Deputy Speaker
I should inform the House that the amendment involves privilege.

§ Mr. Peter Snape (West Bromwich, East)
I appreciate that any grant aid under section 56 of the Transport Act 1968 is forbidden under the terms of the amendment. Will the Minister tell me whether that would also preclude any financial assistance to British Rail under any other Act with regard to the provision of adequate railway facilities — both passenger and freight—prior to the opening of the Channel tunnel in 1993?
I understand that the amendment is narrow and deals specifically with section 56 of the 1968 Act. I hope that the acceptance of the amendment will not preclude British Rail from making proper and full provision for passenger and freight traffic expected and projected in the run-up to the opening of the Channel tunnel. I do not expect the Minister to comment on this, but it is somewhat ironic that the British Ports Association should be so anxious for statutes to be written into law when it was the first to demand that the roads to the ports be improved at each and every opportunity — not at their expense but at public expense.
There appears to be a little inconsistency here, although I do not expect the Minister to follow me down this controversial road.

§ Mr. Mitchell
I can understand the hon. Gentleman's anxiety about British Rail being able to carry out the investment that it requires to enable it to finance the marshalling yards and other provisions. The Bill as amended makes it explicit that there can be no Government grants to British Rail in respect of Eurotunnel's services, but British Rail is perfectly able to use its borrowing powers and commercial money to make the investments that it requires to carry through what is, for it, a commercial project.