Channel Tunnel Rail Link (Hansard, 15 March 1989)

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, British Rail has had quite detailed environmental assessments carried out by consultants and the route which they have now announced was heavily influenced both by these assessments and by the environmental criteria established by Kent County Council. They have also taken into account the estimated costs of different routes and different levels of environmental treatment. British Rail estimates that the costs of environmental protection on the chosen route amount to some £500 million or 30 per cent. of the total costs of the project.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, while it is clearly good news that British Rail has indeed obtained an environmental assessment of the whole complex of possible routes, can the Government assure the House that such an environmental assessment of all those routes which might have been reasonable will be before them when the Select Committees exercise their duty of looking after the country as a whole?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I cannot give the noble Lord the assurance that he seeks that a full 232 environmental impact study of each of the possible routes will be available. As I said in my original Answer, they were taken into account. There will now be a more detailed environmental assessment of the preferred route which will be completed by the time British Rail deposits a Private Bill.

§ Lord Underhill
My Lords, has not the Prime Minister stated that the costs of the link must be borne by its users? If that is correct, will the Government reconsider the position? Assuming that there is an environmentally satisfactory link, will it not be of value throughout the country including through passenger trains from far north of the South-East? Though freight trains will not use the link, British Rail state that it will enable far more freight trains to be used on the existing link, and 75 per cent. of its freight trains come from beyond the South-East. Is the new link not of national importance, so should not the cost of building the infrastructure be borne by the state as a whole?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, the Government's view is clear. It is that the route should be financed by its users. If they happen to come from north of London they must share the proportion of the cost.

§ Lord Bruce-Gardyne
My Lords, I listened with interest to my noble friend's reply to the last question and found it most reassuring. Can he confirm that, regardless of the future escalation of the costs of the project—which on previous experience may be two, five or 10 times more—and the Government's insistence that under no circumstances must it be a burden on the taxpayer, the route will always be maintained?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I can give my noble friend the assurance that he seeks. At Question Time on 9th March my right honourable friend the Prime Minister said: It is Government policy that the users of the new line should pay for the full costs, including environmental costs"—[Official Report, House of Commons, 9.3.89; col. 1029.]

§ Lord Kinnaird
My Lords, can the Minister say whether, when leaving the London terminal, the link will be routed underground?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, yes, the first part of the route from London will be underground. Noble Lords may have received a copy of British Rail's proposals for the Channel Tunnel rail link. If my noble friend has not received a copy I shall ensure that he does so.

§ Lord Annan
My Lords, is the noble Lord correct in saying that the whole of the rail link in London will be underground? Is he aware that the plan envisages the demolition of nine acres to the south-south-east of King's Cross station? The area contains a number of unlisted buildings, including some exquisite buildings which were erected at exactly the same time as King's Cross station, such as Keystone Crescent. Is the Minister aware that in the area there is a flourishing Italian community whose residents 233 came to this country at the time of Mussolini's dictatorship, thus escaping from the one indubitable blessing that he gave to Italy; that the trains ran on time?
Will the noble Lord look into the matter? Does he agree that there is almost no reason why the high speed trains should emerge from their tunnel in all their glory above ground when they could perfectly well emerge in the station area underground as they do in the termini in New York and, as they used to do, in the Gare Quai D'Orsai in Paris?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I did not say that the whole of the link in London would be underground. I urge the noble Lord, Lord Annan, to look at the proposals put forward by British Rail. When the Bill comes before Parliament there will be an opportunity for all such matters to be discussed and petitions to be dealt with.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, is the Minister giving the House the welcome news that the portion of the link which it is proposed to run from Waterloo from Peckham Rye is now to be underground? On the maps it is shown as running above ground at present.

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, no, I was referring to the new link to King's Cross. I urge the noble Lord to look at the maps and see what they show, rather than my trying to explain them in this House at Question Time.

§ Lord St. John of Fawsley
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that many people will support the noble Lord, Lord Annan, in his fears for the destruction of that historic part of London? Can the Minister assure the House that Keystone Crescent, which is as fine a crescent as Pelham Crescent, will not be destroyed, because that is my understanding?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, no, I cannot give that assurance because I do not know whether it will be destroyed under the procedure. I cannot be an expert on every mile of the track. However, when the Bill comes before Parliament there will be an opportunity to examine all such issues.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, is the Minister aware that there is a widespread belief that the principle that the "users"—the word is not precisely defined—should bear the heavy cost is not equitable? Can he say whether that issue can be considered by the Committee when the Bill goes through Parliament.

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, I imagine that anything can be considered when the Bill goes through Parliament. However, it remains the Government's view that the user should pay. They will need to be convinced that the link is a viable concern before British Rail receives the go-ahead to submit a Bill.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, does the Minister agree that the Bill will stand a much better chance of passing through unmangled if Parliament is not 234 required to give a simple yes or no answer to one route, but is offered a number of alternatives from which to choose?

§ Lord Brabazon of Tara
My Lords, no, I cannot agree with that suggestion. I believe that to have a wide choice of routes would be a recipe for disaster and on that basis the Bill would stand no chance.