§ 2.37 p.m.
§ LORD GLADWYNMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have considered the document entitled Channel Bridge or Channel Tunnel? submitted on December 5 to the Minister of Transport by the Road Federation, the Road Haulage Association, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, the R.A.C., the A.A. and the R.S.A.C., with which the British Iron and Steel Federation subsequently associated itself, and whether they are now prepared to give an assurance that no final decision as regards a Bridge or a Tunnel will be taken until Parliament has had an opportunity of considering and debating the Report of the Anglo-French Committee of Experts which, it would seem, is to be expected shortly.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (LORD CHESHAM)My Lords, the document has been considered by my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport, and the views it contains will be taken fully into account by Her Majesty's Government when officials submit their conclusions jointly to the French and British Governments. I can make no firm statement at this stage on when this will be, or on what procedure it will then seem right to adopt, though the Government will certainly bear in mind the wish of Parliament to be fully informed. The question of publication will be a matter for consultation between my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport and his French colleague in the first instance.
§ LORD GLADWYNMy Lords, will not the noble Lord or the Government urge on their French colleagues the desirability of publishing the report of the experts? If it is not published, obviously Parliament will not be able to pronounce on the pros and cons of this extremely important project; they will not be able to know what the facts are unless this document is published. Therefore, I do hope that the Government will at least explain to their French colleagues the extreme desirability of publishing the report, and I trust that the noble Lord will bring this to the attention of his right honourable friend.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I am sure that the words of the noble Lord will be borne in mind when discussions take place between my right honourable friend and his French colleague.
§ LORD CONESFORDMy Lords, are Her Majesty's Government under the impression that either they or the French Government would have any right to build permanent obstructions on the High Seas even if they wished to do so?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, that is one of the matters that is at present engaging a good deal of attention.
§ VISCOUNT BRIDGEMANMy Lords, does my noble friend realise that, not-withstanding what my noble friend Lord Conesford has just said, plans for the bridge, although they were produced late in the day, are gaining a great deal of support from influential sections in this country?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, as with the document referred to, so I do here.
VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLS-BOROUGHMy Lords, should I be right in assuming that the Government are fully aware of the large volume of opinion in the country which is against the project?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I think the Government are not left in much doubt as to opinions which are held by various sections of the community.
LORD REAMy Lords, are the Government aware of the large volume of opinion in the country which is in favour of the proposal?
§ LORD CHESHAMThe answer to that is precisely the same.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, would my noble friend remember, too, that the Parliamentary Committee, which consists of about 200 Members of both Houses, is in favour of a tunnel and not a bridge?
§ LORD CHESHAMThe answer is the same again, my Lords.