§ 10. Mr. GillTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport what consideration he has given to the siting of one of the proposed Channel tunnel terminals to the north of central London.
§ Mr. PortilloThe siting of Channel tunnel rail terminals is a matter for British Rail, which has suggested King's Cross, Stratford or White City as possible sites.
§ Mr. GillI appreciate that the decision must rest with the commercial undertaking—in this case, British Rail. However, will my hon. Friend use his considerable influence to encourage British Rail to look at the possibility of using the cheaper and more extensive sites available to it to the north of central London? Will he also seek to remind British Rail of the folly of bringing into central London one more passenger than necessary, bearing in mind the considerable congestion that already exists in the metropolis, which is bordering on paralysis? Will he further consider that by encouraging British Rail to choose a site away from central London he would considerably assist the spread of prosperity to the regions beyond the south-east, including Scotland and the Principality of Wales?
§ Mr. PortilloI am as keen as my hon. Friend to ensure that the advantages and benefits of the Channel tunnel extend to every region. Ideally, the terminal site that is chosen must offer services and easy interchange to the regions. However, my hon. Friend must recognise that many people want to travel from the centre of Paris or Brussels to the heart of London and the terminal must cater for them, too.
§ Mr. PikeDoes the Minister recognise that the second largest concentration of population in the country lies in the belt from the Mersey to the Humber, and that to enable people to travel in the best possible way we need a terminal in the north-west, which could serve both those regions and be an advantage not only to them, but to London, by relieving congestion there?
§ Mr. PortilloThe hon. Gentleman knows that section 40 of the Channel Tunnel Act 1987 requires British Rail to come forward with plans by the end of next year for the freight and passenger services that it proposes to put in place in the regions. Discussions are now taking place through working parties in every region and I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will want to make his point of view known to those working parties.
§ Mr. HindDoes my hon. Friend consider that building terminals at, for example, Manchester and Liverpool, and using route four, which was suggested by my hon. Friend the Member for Christchurch (Mr. Adley) in his excellent magazine "Tunnel Vision", will take an awful lot of traffic out of the centre of London and straight into the tunnel and thus deal with the problem that my hon. Friend the Member for Ludlow (Mr. Gill) has mentioned?
§ Mr. PortilloI read "Tunnel Vision" with great interest. I hope that my hon. Friend the author will pursue those proposals with British Rail. It will be for him to convince British Rail that that route makes the best possible sense.
§ Mrs. Margaret EwingWhat role is the Department playing in ensuring that British Rail does not concentrate all its efforts on the golden triangle in the south-east? Is the Department trying to use its influence to persuade British Rail that it should electrify north of the central belt in Scotland to ensure that the Grampian region and the Highlands and Islands are not disadvantaged?
§ Mr. PortilloI do not believe that electrification is the crucial issue for freight services. However, we have written into the Channel Tunnel Act the requirement that British Rail should bring forward its proposals for the regions for both freight and passenger traffic. I look forward, as I am sure does the hon. Lady, to those proposals being made by the end of next year.