§ 2.36 p.m.
§ Viscount De L'Isle asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ Whether a decision has been reached to arrange on-train clearance only for passengers travelling from the Continent beyond London for immigration and Customs services, and whether it is still their intention to erect an airport-style clearance building at Waterloo for similar purposes for passengers travelling to London.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Lord Brabazon of Tara)My Lords, the Government's view remains that the most convenient and practicable option for Waterloo trains is a quick and effective airport-type Customs and immigration control at the station.
Viscount De L'IsleMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for his reply, does it signify that up-to-date Customs clearance for passengers to London on the fast rail link will not be in place by the time that link comes into service? If so, are we to expect the institution of an archaic post-journey system at the London terminal, a system which has long since been superseded on Continental cross-border trains?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, the plans are that there should be airport-style controls at Waterloo station similar to those in operation at airports and seaports at the present time. We do not accept that these controls will cause significant delay because the time taken to get through Customs and immigration is normally minimal.
§ Lord StrabolgiMy Lords, what is to happen on the French side between the coast and Paris? Will there be on-train clearance?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, obviously, I cannot speak for the French Government. But if the trains are to be non-stop from Waterloo through to Paris, then they will have to arrange something at the Paris end.
§ Lord Peyton of YeovilMy Lords, would my noble friend not agree that a combination of timeconsuming procedures and inappropriate formalities on the one hand and inadequate, slow-moving rail facilities on the other would be a singularly poor contribution on the part of this country to a very important project? Does my noble friend further agree that there is a great burden of responsibility upon the Government to see that this does not happen?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, the Government are well aware of the situation. At present we are awaiting a report from British Rail on the capacity constraints between London and the Tunnel. We expect the report to be published very shortly. That will clarify the situation as to whether there is a need for a new high-speed link. I cannot anticipate the conclusions of that report at the moment.
§ Lord Carmichael of KelvingroveMy Lords, I believe the House will recall that we debated this matter very fully during the passage of the Channel Tunnel Bill. I believed that the Government were coming round to the on-train clearance system. We know that there is a problem between British Rail, the Department of Transport and the Treasury. Can the Minister say whether this problem is any closer to resolution? We know that for very many years now the French and the Continentals have been operating a system with the minimum of carriage space. However, I understand that if there is on-train clearance the Treasury requires one-and-a-half carriages which seems to be quite excessive. Can the Minister tell us anything about the negotiations with the Treasury as regards this matter?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, talks between British Rail and the Treasury—not forgetting immigration and its controls—are still continuing with regard to the provision of on-train controls for services going beyond London to the North. I know that was a subject that greatly concerned your Lordships when the Bill was passing through this House. At that time the Government agreed to facilitate on-train controls for those trains.
As regards the number of carriages for these facilities which the noble Lord mentioned ߞnamely, one-and-a-half per train—it is far too early to say what the realistic requirement is likely to be. This matter is being discussed by British Rail and the authorities at the moment. I would be surprised if the figure needed to be anything like the one mentioned.
§ Lord Orr-EwingMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that the planned speed of the train to the Channel Tunnel in France is 125 miles per hour but that in this country it will work out at 53 miles per hour? This seems an enormous disparity even before one adds the delays caused by immigration and Customs controls at the end of the journey. As there is an immense investment in hardware both by ourselves and the French, is it not worthwhile spending a little more time, energy and money on making sure that the immigration and Customs controls, which will exist on trains going around 247 London and travelling south and west and to the north of England are extended once that principle has been proved so that they may be operated on the Channel to Waterloo line as well as on the round services?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, it is really a matter of convenience to people. I do not accept that any significant delays will be caused. Delays at airports are generally caused by people waiting for their baggage. Once they have it they normally pass through immigration and Customs extremely quickly unless there are suspicious circumstances. Of course we still need controls, and we shall continue to need them, to deal with drugs and terrorism and so on.The alternative of on-train controls for the Waterloo services would require travelling Customs and immigration officers; it would be quite an expensive use of manpower. Furthermore, it would mean that people were approached in the middle of their lunch, for instance, when they might prefer to have these matters dealt with on reaching Waterloo. There is an argument for Waterloo.
§ Lord TordoffMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the cost of setting up airport-type facilities at Waterloo far exceeds the cost of having people working on the trains? Is he further aware that I tried to move amendments to the Channel Tunnel Bill for on-train Customs and immigration facilities from Waterloo as well as the rest of the country? I am delighted to find so many noble Lords now coming round to support that view.
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, the cost of the Customs hall at Waterloo will be between £4 million and £5 million. That is a one-off cost for building it, whereas keeping Customs and immigration officials on the trains is an ongoing cost.Furthermore, even if there were on-train controls there would still need to be facilities for the Customs and immigration services at the terminal at Waterloo, so they would not all be new costs.
§ Lord TordoffMy Lords, perhaps I may just follow up that point.How many Customs and immigration officials can be employed and for how long for £4 million or £5 million?At the time the Bill was going through the House the cost was expected to be £8 million.How many people can be employed and for how long for that cost?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, I cannot honestly give an answer to that question.Quite a number of trains will be operating on the line at the same time.I do not know what the figure will be, but each train will have to have its own number of people.It is not possible for me to give an answer to the noble Lord's question.
§ Lord BarnettMy Lords, are the Government truly committed to the internal market in 1992?If so, why will there need to be any Customs officials?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, we are fully committed to reducing the barriers to trade within 248 the EC so far as possible by 1992; but as I said earlier we will still need controls against drugs, terrorism and so on.That is well understood and I hope accepted by noble Lords.
§ Lord JayMy Lords, is the Minister aware that a great deal of money has been raised for this project on the basis of promises about times and speeds which cannot possibly be carried out without a great deal of expenditure of public money? Would it not have been rather better to have studied all these facts before the money was raised and the promises given?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, I think that all the facts were studied carefully before the money was raised.Indeed, I do not think the money would have been raised unless the investors knew what they were letting themselves in for.