§ 3. Mr. AdleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects to have completed his review of Channel tunnel rail infrastructure investment; and if he will make a statement, relating particularly to electrification of the Redhill to Reading line.
§ Mr. ChannonI assume that my hon. Friend is referring to British Rail's study of the possible need for additional rail capacity to cope with traffic growth after the tunnel opens. I have asked for a report by June. Possible additional use of the Redhill to Reading line is being looked at during the study.
§ Mr. AdleyI thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does he agree that if the regions of this country are to obtain the maximum benefit from the tunnel, we need to be able to get rail traffic round rather than through London? Does he recall that the South-Eastern Railway built the Tonbridge-Redhill-Reading line for the very purpose of a future Channel tunnel more than 100 years ago, that it was kept open by the Beeching proposals against the day when the tunnel would be built, but that so far the Government have refused to sanction the investment in the line for British Rail, so that all the trains will be pushed through central London? Does my right hon. Friend also agree that, compared with what the French are doing, we are in danger of having a penny-pinching railway system and a penny-farthing railway to go with it?
§ Mr. ChannonI cannot quite agree with my hon. Friend. We have in general terms authorised investment by British Rail in the Channel tunnel project up to about £550 million. British Rail will now have to put detailed appraisals forward for each investment proposal. We are 686 studying what my hon. Friend said about the RedhillReading line. Obviously his views will be taken into account, but there may well be better ways of doing it than the Redhill-Reading line. Just because it was suitable in he middle of the 19th century does not mean that it will be the best proposal at this stage. However, I do not rule it out. We will study it during the next few months.
Mrs. Ray MitchieWill the review of rail infrastructure include consideration of the reopening of Freightliner depots, particularly the three that were closed in Scotland fairly recently?
§ Mr. ChannonThe question whether such a depot should be opened depends on whether it would he commercially worth while arid whether British Rail could show that it would provide a reasonable return. I do riot think that the study will specifically include that subject, but I shall write to the hon. Lady.
§ Mr. Simon CoombsWill my right hon. Friend remind the House of the number of jobs so far created as a result of the Channel tunnel project? Will he also remind himself from time to time of the advantages of the Reading to Redhill link for the western region, while remembering at the same time the difficulty of the connection between electrification and the diesel operation of the western region?
§ Mr. ChannonMy hon. Friend raises a very important point. If we electrify the Redhill to Reading line, we have to decide what happens beyond Reading — [Interruption.] The connecting lines beyond Reading are not electrified either. The matter is more complicated than it might seem, although we are certainly examining it.
A reasonable estimate is that about 3,000 jobs will be involved in the building of the tunnel. Furthermore, there will be an enormous spin-off of prosperity and jobs when the Channel tunnel is the great success that I am sure it will be.
§ Mr. Barry JonesIf the Channel tunnel is to provide a great stimulus to the rail industry, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman has any plans for electrifying the Crewe to Holyhead rail line? Does he understand that our unemployment problems would be greatly assisted by such investment?
§ Mr. ChannonI admire the hon. Gentleman's ingenuity. However, we are not planning a tunnel under the Irish sea as yet; perhaps that will come. I do not think that British Rail has proposed what the hon. Gentleman has in mind, but the Government have never turned down any worthwhile investment proposal put forward by British Rail.
§ Mr. SackvilleWill my right hon. Friend remember that many of us have supported the Channel tunnel principle on the assumption that his Department will do everything possible to ensure that the benefits accrue not only to the south-east but to the whole of Britain? Will he therefore ensure that there is a proper through rail link between the north of England and our major European markets?
§ Mr. ChannonI entirely understand my hon. Friend's view, and I agree with him. I am convinced, as are the majority of hon. Members, that there will be considerable benefits to all parts of the country. Indeed, that applies to what is already happening. Materials are coming from firms in the north-east and Scotland, and that is important 687 in itself. British Rail is required by the Channel Tunnel Bill to prepare a plan setting out its service proposals, including proposals for through services to all other parts of the country. It is too early to say what the pattern of services will be. Widespread consultation will have to take place in the preparation of the plan, but my hon. Friend has made an extremely important point.